Skip to main content

Full text of "The Open court"

See other formats


Digitized by tine Internet Arcliive 

in 2009 witli funding from 

CARLI: Consortium of Academic and Researcli Libraries in Illinois 

The Open Court. 




Volume V, 


The Open Court Publishing Company. 








Agnosticism, The Questions of. Ellis Thurlell 2733 

Agnosticism Philosophical, and Monism. Lewis G. Janes 2947 

Agnosticism in The Monist. Ellis Thurtell. . . ^. . .^ ^ 2950 

Allegory, A Moral. C. S. Wake 2757 

American Progress. Voltairine de Cleyre 3040 

Anarchy, A Lance for. Voltairine de Cleyre 2963 

Anthropophagy, A Chapter on. (Concluded.) Richard Andree 2718 

Belief in God. (Giftord Lectures.) F. Max Miiller 2731 

Bradlaugh, Thomas Paine and Charles. Moncure D. Conway 2725 

Breath and the Name of the Soul. The Hon. Lady Welby 2893 

Bright Eyes and Dark Eyes. F. Mas Miiller 2843 

Briggs, Professor, and the Heretics' Sheol. Moncure D. Conway 3055 

Camorra, The American. Felix L. Oswald 2723 

Capital and Labor, The Relation Between. C. Staniland Wake ... 2844 

Children as Teachers. E. A. Kirkpatrick 2789 

Christianity, Its Spirit and Its Errors. Vladimir SoloviefE 2809, 2917 

Christmas Cult and the Christmas Spirit. The. Celia Parker WooUey. . . 3065 

Coincidence, Delusions of. F. L. Oswald 2939 

Communal Ethics. Moncure D. Conway 2891 

Competition and Progress. F. M. Holland 2884 

Comte's Gospel of Wealth. Louis Belrose Jr 2755 

Congress at Newcastle, The Trades Union. M. M. Trumbull 2987 

Corner-Stone, A Crumbhng. Charles K. Whipple 2983 

Creed ? What was Abraham Lincoln's. George M. McCrie 3031 

Criminology, Ethics as Applied to. Arthur Mac Donald 2861 

Criticisms, Short Discussions and. John Burroughs 2739, 2851 

Current Topics. The Nc-w Nation and Nationalism, 2720; Plagiar- 
ism.— The Right to Work, 2727 ; Insincerity in Religion and Politics, 
2745 ; The Bench and Party Politics.— The Closing of Congress, 2751 ; 
The Loss of the S. S. Utopia, 2758; The Talk of War with Italy.— 
The Law of Husband and Wife.— Juvenile Criminals, 27S5 ; Foreign 
Subjects.— The Gospel Messengers.— Reciprocity in Religion.— The 
Commonwealth of Australia, 2791 ; Field Marshal Moltke. — Free 
Schools and Free Dinners, 2799 ; Nicknames in Politics.— The Comedy 
of the Two Governors.— The Ministry to China. 2809; Prayers For 
Ourselves.—The Secret of Long Life.— A Party Organ. 2S24 ; Brigand- 
age and Ransom. — Gaming and Cheating, 2840; Lord Wolseley as a 
Critic— Searching for the Pole —The Epidemic of Heresy. 2857; 
Royal Patronage of Home Industry.— The Colonisation Scheme of 
Baron De Hirsch. — Royal Baptism. — Compromise in Creeds, 2873 ; 
America for Americans.— The German Emperor in England.— An- 
other Oliver Twist, 2SS0 ; The Emperor's Guildhall Speech.— War 
on the Sparrow.— The Hamlin-Johnson Controversy, 2887 ; The Mean- 
ing of Sheeny. — Sherman the Stowaway. — The Courtesy of Assassins, 
2897; The Colored Church.— Keep Americans at Home.— A Genuine 
Monopolist.— Village Political Economy, 2903 ; Judicial Anarchy in 
Kansas.— Restormg Battle Flags.— Judge Altgeld's Opinion of the Ju- 
diciary. 2913 ; The Negro in Office.— The Eifel Tower for Chicago.— 
James Russell Lowell, 2920; The Game Laws.— Pensions Made Easy. 
—Persuading Non-Union Men.— The International Congress at Brus- 
sels, 2927; The Holy Coat and Miracles.— The Chinese Menace to 
Christendom.— Closing the Fair on Sundays.— The Jewish Exiles as 
Workingmen, 2965 ; Artificial Rain. — Oklahoma. — Herbert Spencer 
and the Land Question. 2971 ; Discord in Rhetoric— The " Chief Ex- 
ecutive."— Industrial Schools.— Government Aid to Art. 2980; Ger- 
many and American Poik.— Vicarious Atonement.— The Worship of 
Dead Heroes.— The Indian as a Target.— Von Moltke on the Sword, 
2997; Eagle or Owl.— The Affair with Chile.— Government by the De- 
partments.— Suspected Letters.— A Prose Poem, 3020: China and the 
Missionaries.— The Australian Ballot.- The Revision of Creeds, 3028 ; 
Kindness to Animals.— The Band of Mercy.— Contradictory Qualifica- 
tions for Jurymen.— Seizing Books in the Post Office,— Infant Salva- 
tion, 3037 : Abraham Lincoln's Creed.— Wholesome Starvation.— The 
Sacrament of Charity.- Bidding for the Convention.- The Right of 
Social Privacy. 3043; The Contest for the Speakership.— The Pro- 
tection of Birds.— The Tariff on Art.— The Reaction Against Libertv. 
3052; The Code of Leviticus.— Stoning a Chinaman.— Flowers for 
Statesmen.— The North West Beaten.— Heart against Brain, 3061 ; 
The Speaker and his Perquisites.— Throwing a Man into Heaven.— 
Getting back Election Expenses.— The Evolution of Christmas, 3068 ; 
Giving by Deputy.— The Gerrymander, 3086, M. M. Trumbull. 


"Darkest England," The Sunset Club in. M. M. Trumbull 276S 

Darwinism, Wallace on. J. C. F. Grumbine ; 2813 

Declaration of Independence, The Stoi^ of the. Moncure D. Conway... 2859 

Delusions of Coincidence. F.L.Oswald 2939 

Dementia. Paretic. S. V. Clevenger 3000 

Differentiation, The Logic of. Helen A Clarke 2837 

Discussions and Criticisms, Short. John Burroughs 2739 

Divine and the Human in Religion, Ther F. Max MuHer 2819 

Ecumenical Council, The Methodist. M. M. Trumbull 3005 

Educational Reform. Felix L. Oswald 2875 

Emerson Fifty Years Ago. F. M. Holland 2787 

Enthusiasm and Intoxication in Their Ethical Significance. E. D. Cope 3072 

Errors, The Beneficial Aspect of Certain. John Burroughs 2941 

Ethics. The Physiological Conditions of. Morrison I. Swift 2736 

Ethics of the Sexes, The New. Susan Channing 2798 

Ethics as Applied to Criminologv. Arthur Mac Donald 2861 

Ethical Theory, Selfishness as an. W. M. Salter 2867 

Ethics, The Philosophy of Selfishness and Metaphysical. Voltairine de 

Cleyre 2871 

Ethics. Communal. Moncure D. Conway 2891 

Ethics in the Public Schools. William Edward Russell 2926 

Ethics. A Few Instances of Applied. Arthur Mac Donald 3008 

Every Man in his Place. F.M.Holland 2924 

Evolution and Human Progress. Joseph Le Conte 2779 

Eyes, Bright Eyes and Dark. F. Max Muller 2843 

Folk-Tales, The Philosophy of. L. J. Vance 2935 

Frost and Freedom. Felix L. Oswald 2803 

God, Belief in. (Gifford Lectures.) F. Max Muller 2731 

Hirsch, E. G., on The Public Schools 2874 

Hope Eternal, A Doubter's. Wm. Arch. McClean 2820 

Ideas, The R6ie of, in the Constitution of Personality, Th. Ribot 2742 

Independence. The Story of the Declaration of. Moncure D, Conway . . . 2859 
Intoxication, Enthusiasm and, in Their Ethical Significance. E. D. Cope 3072 

Invasion of the South, The New, M. M. Trumbull 2944 

Italy, Religious Prospects of. Ednah D. Cheney 2885 

jury System, The Sunset Club on the. M. M. Trumbull 2832 

Kreutzer Sonata, The. P. K. Rosegger 2795 

Kreutzer Sonata, The. Charles K. Whipple 2796 

Labor Parliament of England, The. Geo. Julian Harney 2805 

Labor, The Relation Between Capital and. C. Staniland Wake 2844 

Labor Question, Shakespeare on the. Wm. Schuyler 2931 

Labor Forces at the South, New. T. Thomas Fortune 3007 

Lamennais, The Abbe. The Christian Saint in our Republican Calendar. 

Geo. Julian Harney 2959 

Lincoln's Religion, Abraham. Theodore Stanton 2962 

Linton, William James. Geo. Julian Harney 2969 

Logic of Differentiation, The. Helen A. Clarke 2837 

Magic, The Natural History of. L J. Vance ■*. ..2763, 2773, 2783 

Martyrs, Woman's. F. M. Holland 2999 

Materialism, Controversial — or What do we Mean by Matter? Edmund 

Noble 3033 

Methodist Ecumenical Council, The. M.M.Trumbull 3005 

Money and its Functions. Lyman J. Gage 2715 

Money and its Functions, A Debate on. M. M. Trumbull 2734 

Monism, Philosophical Agnosticism and. Lewis G. Janes 2947 

New Orleans, The Tragedy at. M. M. Trumbull 2776 

Nonsense. Some. With a Pure Mathematical Moral. Hudor Genone... 2847 

Ontogeny, Phylogeny and. Ernst Haeckel 2967 

Paine, Thomas, and Charles Bradlaugh. Moncure D. Conway 2725 

Paine, An Unpublished Letter of Thomas 3039 

Parker's Grave, Theodore. Theodore Stanton 3063 

THE OPEN COURT.— Indkx to Volume V. 


Particular, The Universal and the. R.N.Foster.. 3047 

Personality, The Role of Ideas in the Constitution of. Th. Ribot 2742 

Place, Every Man in his. V. M. Holland 2924 

Pleasure in Selfishness and Altruism. J. C. F. Grumbine 2869 

Philosophy, The Latest Phase of Herbert Spencer's. T. B. Wakeman. . . 2907 

Philosophy of Folk-Tales, The. L. J. Vance 2935 

Philosophy, Herbert Spencer's. Lewis G. Janes 2991 

Phylogeny and Ontogeny. Ernst Haeckel 2967 

Points of View. John Burroughs 3066 

Polity, Our Future.' T. B. Wakeman 2790 

Polyandry, Promiscuity and Survival. Susan Channing 2896 

Prince of Wales, The. Moncure D. Conway 3026 

Prisons, English Reformers and American. M. M. Trumbull 2839 

Progress, Evolution and Human. Joseph Le Conte 2779 

Progress, Competition and. F.M.Holland 2884 

Progress, American. Voltairine de Cleyre 3040 

Public Schools, Ethics in the. William Edward Russell 2926 

Public Schools, E. G. Hirsch on the 2874 

Reform, Educational. Felix L. Oswald 2875 

Religion in Inquirendo. Hudor Genone 2719 

Religion, The Divine and the Human in, F. Max Muller 2819 

Religion, Abraham Lincoln's. Theodore Stanton 2962 

Revolution, The Present Religious. J. C. F. Grumbine 2975, 3001 

Russia and the United States. With Remarks by M. M. Trumbull 2895 

D. Cope. 

Schliemann, Recollect 
Schools, E. G. Hirsch 
Science Text-Books. 

ons of Henry. Theodore Stanton 2748 

in the Public 2874 

E. P. Powell 2855 

Sex, Material Relations of, in Human Society. 1 
Sexes, The New Ethic of the. Susan Channing. 

Selfishness: A Psychological Argument. Wm. M. Salter 

Selfishness as an Ethical Theory. Wm. M. Salter 

Selfishness, Pleasure in, and Altruism. J. C. F. Grumbine 

Selfishness ; A Psychological Argument. A. H. Heinemann 

Selfishness, The Philosophy of, and Metaphysical Ethics. Voltairine 


Shakespeare on the Labor Question. Wm. Schuyler 

Sheol, Professor Briggs and the Heretics'. Moncure D. Conway. -».. . 

Slipper, The Little Glass. Hudor Genone 

Socialism and Transcendentalism. F. M. Holland 

Soul, The Discovery of the, F. Max Muller 

Soul, Breath' and the Name of the. Lady Welby 

Soul, The Nature of the. T. B. Wakeman 

Spencer's Herbert, Philosophy, The Latest Phase of. T. B. Wakema 
Spencer's Herbert, Philosophy. Lewis G. Janes 

Teachers, Children a 
Trades Union Congri 
^ ndentalism, ' 


■ 2748 

■ 2798 
. 2827 
. 2867 


E. A. Kirkpatrick 2789 

; at Newcastle, The. M.M.Trumbull 2987 

cialism and. F. M. Holland 2812 

Universal, The, and the Particular. R. N. Foster 3047 

University Extension Movement, The. Frincis Churchill Williams 3015 

Wallace on Darwinism. J. C. F. Grumbine 2813 

Wales. The Prince of. Moncure D. Conway 3026 

Wealth, Comte's Gospel of. Louis Belrose, Jr 2755 

Woman's Martyrs. F. M. Holland 2999 


Agnosticism, Spencerian 2951 

Agnosticism Revised, The Case of 2993 

American Ideal, The 2807 

Anarchism, Socialism and 2856 

Aristocratomania 2846 

Ben-Midrash, the Gardener of Galilee 3019 

Clearness, The Importance of, and the Charm 

of Haziness 2923 

Christianity, The Corner-stone of 29^6 

Corner-stone of Christianity, The 29S6 

Doubt, Faithzand 2822 

Emancipation, Woman 2747 

Encyclical, The Pope's 2877 

Ethics in our Public Schools 2816 

Ethics of Struggle, The. and Ethical Culture. 3059 

Ethics of Evolution, The 3004 

Ethical Culture, The Ethics of Struggle and.. 3059 

Evolution and Immortality 3044 

Evolution, The Ethics of' 3004 

Faith and Doubt 2822 

Feeling. The Monistic Definition of the Term. 2909 
Freethought, Its Truth and its Error 2902 

Galilee, Ben-Midrash, The Gardener of 3019 

Ghosts 2811 

God. The Conceptions of 2771 

God and Immortality, Professor Haeckel's Mt-- 

nism and the Ideas 2957 

God a Mind ? Is 2978 

Haeckel's, Professor, Monism and the Ideas 

God and Immortality 2957 

Hard times teach. The Lesson that 3042 

Haziness. The Importance of Clearness and 

the Charm of 2923 

Heresy, Max Miiller Denounced for 2829 

Ideal, The American 2807 

Immortality and Science 3023 

Immortality, Evolution and 3044 

Immortality, Science and 3050 

Infinite a Religious Idea ? Is the 2732 

Materialism, The Error of. [In Answer to 

Paul R. Shipmnn's Criticism.] 2S23 

Mind ? Is God a 2978 

Monism, Professor Haeckel's, and the Ideas 

God and Immortality 2957 

Monist, The. A Review of its Work and a 

Sketch of its Philosophy 3073 

Morality and Religion, Mr. Goldwin Smith 

on 2765 

Morality and Virtue 3011 

Miiller, Max, Denounced for Heresy. [From 

the Glasgozo Herald. ] 2829 

New Year's Eve and New Year's Day 3071 


Pope's Encyclical, The 2877 

Progress, The Test of .....: 2915 

Progress, The Religion ot 2964 

Progress of Religion, The 2834 

Prometheus and the Fate of Zeus 2970 

Public Schools, Ethics in our 2816 

Religion, The Progress of 2834 

Religion of Progress, The 2964 

Reviews, Some, of "The Soul of Man.' 2777 

Science, Immortality and 3023 

Science and Immortality 3050 

Smith, Mr. Goldwin. on Morality and Religion 2765 

Socialism and Anarchism 2S56 

" Soul of Man, The," Some Reviews of 2777 

Soul, The Unity of the 2S83 

Spencerian Agnosticism 2951 

Struggle. TheEthics of, and Ethical Culture. 3059 
Suicide be Justified? Can 291X 

Test of Progress, The 2915 

Unity of the Soul, The 2883 

Universal, The Philosophy of the 3051 

Virtue, Morality and 3011 

Woman Emancipation 2747 

Zeus, Prometheus and the Fate of 2970 


Agnosticism Justified. IWitli Editorial Note.] Ira V. Burnham 2721 

Art, The United States and. [With Remarks by M. M. Trumbull.] F 

de Gissac 2946 

Children, Mr. Herbert Spencer on Cruelty to. S. V, Clevenger 2929 

Competition, Emulation versus. [With Rejoinder by F. M. Holland,] 

Wm. Myall 2972 

Consciousness and Energy. (With Editorial Comments.) Alice Bodington, 2888 
Custom House Chicanery. Alice Bodington 3053 

Editorial Supervision. [With Reply by Dr. Carus.] R. E 2989 

Emulation versus Competition. (With Rejoinder by F. M. Holland.] 

Wm. Myall 2972 

Energy, Consciousness and. rWith Editorial Comments.] Alice Bod- 
ington 2888 

Entertainment for the Masses. Hiram M. Stanley 2906 

Ethics, Justice, the Basis of. [With Editorial Note.] Mrs. M. A. Free- 

'"'»" 3045 

Freedom of Will, Law and the. [With Editorial Note.] John Maddock 

and Leroy Berrier 2792 

Freedom of Will, The Problem of the. [With Editorial Note.] Cyrus 

Cole and John Maddock 2760 

Freedom of Will, Law Permits no. ]With Editorial Comments.] John 

Maddock 2841 

Freewill, Concluding Remarks in the Discussion on. [With EdJtorial 

Note.] John Maddock 2881 

Infinite, Religion and the. F. Max Mi'iller 2786 

Jefferson and the Mecklenburg Resolutions. Moncure D. Conway 2973 

Justice, the Basis of Ethics. [With Editorial Note.] Mrs. M. A. Freeman. 3045 

rge^ Henry, and The Open Court. [With Editorial Note.) J. 

"is 2732 

Materialism versus Spiritualism. R. Lewins 2982 

Monogamy, The Question of. C. Staniland Wake 2906 

" Monogamy, The Question of." Susan Channing 2929 

Miiller, F. Max on "Bright Eyes and Dark Eyes." R. Lewins 2905 

Nurse and Soldier. M.M.Trumbull 2865 

Religion of the Future, Apostles of the. Atherton Blight 2737 

Religion and the Infinite. F. Max Miiller 2786 

Sensibility and Consciousness. Mrs. Alice Bodington 2728 

Sensibility and Consciousness. J Harrison Ellis 2817 

Sex, The Economic Relations of. Voltairine de Cleyre and E. D. Cope. 2801 

Sheeny, The Derivation of. Calvin Thomas and Henry Truro Bray 2945 

Sheeny, The Etymology of. [With Reply by M. M. Trumbull.] Calvin 

Thomas 2921 

Slavery, Abolish Woman. Voltairine de Cleyre: 2746 

Spencer, Mr. Herbert, on Cruelty to Children. S. V. Clevenger 2929 

Spiritualism, Materialism versus. R. Lewins 2982 

Suicide, A Few Comments on. Aug. D. Turner :. 2990 

Suicide, On. S. V. Clevenger : 3006 

Virtue and Survival. Mary Gunning. 2S25 

Whitman, Walt, as Pensionee. [With Reply by M. M. Trumbull,] Hor- 
ace L. Traubel 2864 

World's Fair be Open on Sunday? Should the. F. M. Holland 2722 

THE OPEN COURT —Index to Volume V. 


Agnes. Translated from Ibsen by Mary Mor- 
gan (Go wan Lea) 3029 

Answer. Louis Belrose. Jr 2810 

A Japanese Sword. Louis Belrose, Jr 2778 

A Reply. Mary Morgan (Gowan Lea) 2778 

A Sonnet. F. J. P 2S58 


Future Life, 

The Mayflox 


s Thurtell 2759 

W. Schuyler 2937 

Bertha H. Ellsworth 3013 

3r. Ednah D. Cheney 2744 


Theodore Parker. W. W. Story 3064 

To Theodore Weld, in his 89th year. Louis 

Belrose, Jr 2785 

Unrest. Mary Morgan (Gowaii Lea) 2785 

What Shall it Profit? W. D. Howells 28to 


American Secular Union 3030 

American Secular Union's Prize Essay 2738 

Alliance, The Humanitarian .■ 2849 

An Era of Irreligion 3070 

Arithmetical Prodigies 2850 

Balch, Geo. T. Methods of Teaching Patriotism 2754 

Ballou, W. H, The Upper Ten 2794 

Bayless, Alfred. Easy Lessons on The Constitution of the United States. 2834 

Blake. James Vila. St. Solifer, with other Worthies and Unworthies. . . . 2S82 

Blake, James Vila. Happiness from Thoughts and other Sermons 3030 

Block, Louis J. Dramatic Sketches and Poems 2818 

Bradlaugh Charles 2914 

Brinton, Daniel G. The American Race 3013 

Capp, William M. The Daughter, Her Health, Education, and Wedlock. 2826 

Conduct, The Laws of Daily 2738 

Conway, Moncure D. George Washington's Rules of Civility 2729 

Conway, Moncure D 2866 

Crummell, Ales. Africa and America 3046 

Digest of Insurance Cases 2794 

Egidy, M, von. Emste Gedanken 277S 

Emerson ■' Ought Club," The 2938 

Evolution and the Deity 28rS 

Flugel, Ewald. Thomas Carlyle's Moral and Religious Development 3030 

Freidenker Almanach 3046 

Freedom, Friends of Russian 2866 

Future Life 2946 

German Publication, A New 2842 

Gessmann, Gustav. Katechismus der Handlese-Kunst 2778 

Gore, G. The Utility and Morality of Vivisection 2738 

Gosse, Edmund. Northern Studies 2753 

Gould, F. J. The Agnostic Island 2974 

Gronlund, Lawrence. Our Destiny 2722 

Gronlund, Lawrence. The Co-operative Commonwealth 2730 

Haeckel, Ernst, Mr. Wakeman on 2794 

Hancock, Anson Uriel. The Genius of Galilee 2826 

Happiness the Chief Aim of Life 2722 

Harben, Will N. Almost Persuaded 276t 

Harney, George Julian 28to 

Harris, William J. Thoughts on Educational Psychology 2778 

Henry, M. Charles. Harmonies de Formes et de Couleurs 2990 

Hirsch, E G., on The Public Schools 2874 

Holcombe, Wm. H. The Mystery of New Orleans 2794 

Holyoake, George Jacob 2966 

Ibsen, Henrik. Nora ; or A Doll's House. And Ghosts 2730 

Labor Parliament, The 

Leighton, Caroline C. Intimations of Et. 
Levy, J. H. National Liberal Club 


Mohawk, The, and the Holy Ghost 

Morris, William. The House of the Wolfings 

Morris William and Magmisson Eirike. The Saga Library, Vol. I. The 

Story of Howard the Halt, etc 

Morris William and Magniisson Eirike. The Story of the Ere-Dwellers. 
Mailer's Max. Heretical Teaching 


Naden, Miss 

Nation, a Peaceful... 
New Thoughts from ; 

New System of Thoughts : 

Fifth Report of the United States Entomological 

Packard Alphc 


Parker, Theodore 

Penn, I. Garland. The Afro-American Press, and its Editors 

Prince of Wales, The 

Princeton Preparatory School 

Principes de Morale et d'Education Laiques 

Prognostic. The New Reformation 

Reich, Emil. History of Civilisation 

Richter Victor von. Chemistry of the Carbon Compounds 


Smith, Edgar F. and Keller Harry F. Experiments arranged for Students 
in General Chemistry 

Snell, Merwin-Marie. One Hundred Theses on the Foundations of Hu- 
man Knowledge 

Solovieff, Vladimir : 

Soul, The Discovery of the 

Stockwell, C. T. Appendix to Third Edition of the Evolution of Immor- 
tality, , : 

The Century 

The Writer 

Theobald, Robert M. Memorials of John Daniel Morell. M. A., LL.p. 

Theology, The Transition in New England 

Thornton, William. Origin, Purpose, and Destiny of Man 

Tillier, Claude. My Uncle Benjamin 

Tuttle, Hudson. Religion of Man and Ethics of Science 


^Vashi^gton and Frederick the Great 

Westrup, Alfred B. The Financial Problem 

Wheeler, J. M. Freethought Readings and Secular Songs. 

Women at an English University 

Woman's Alliance, Illinois 



The Open Court. 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion with Science. 

No. 183. (Vol. v.— I ) 


[ Two Dollars per Yea 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



Being requested to present a popular explanation 
of money and its functions, I shall endeavor to avoid 
all technical terms and speak in the simplest manner 
possible. We are all deeply interested in getting a 
practical comprehension of what money is in its es- 
sential nature. Let us study it in the past, for the 
past can in all things teach us 'knowledge. 

It is perfectly clear that, through all time, since man 
produced anything bj' his skill or industry, he has been 
in the habit of exchanging that portion of his labor 
which he did not need for his own use, for some por- 
tions more or less great of such things as other men 
by their skill or industry were able to produce beyond 
their own needs, but differing in kind from his own. 
These products were originally directly exchanged for 
each other. But it came about in the evolution of 
ideas, manners, and customs of all people sufficiently 
advanced to be called civilised or semi-civilised, that 
some one product of human skill or industry possessed 
a quicker and more universal exchangeability than any 
other. For it in certain quantities all men became 
willing to exchange whatever they had to exchange, 
whether the product of their labor or their labor ser- 

At different periods and among different people, 
this one peculiar thing was not constantly and every- 
where the same. At one time or place it has been a 
beaver skin ; at another time or place, shells or beads ; 
at another, cattle or slaves; at another, iron, copper, or 
brass ; at another, silver or gold. Now, by reason of 
this peculiar and universal exchangeability, the price 
or exchangeable power of all other commodities came 
to be expressed by the quantity of this one peculiar 
commodity for which they could be e.xchanged. It 
was natural that a name should be attached to the pe- 
culiar thing, and that name was money. 

The books will give all the reasons which led to 
the natural selection of these various things designated 
as money. I shall content myself with one or two. 
First, and fundamentally, they were such things in 
their respective times and places as would universall}' 
minister to the comfort or pleasure of those who pos- 
sessed them. Second, they were in their respective 
times and places relatively the most convenient, not 

only for the purposes of universal exchange, but for 
preservation against further needs. It has been by 
the free play of human choice, ending in a consensus 
of action, that money has been thus evolved, never by 
conventional agreements made in advance. 

In modern times, among civilised nations, silver 
and gold have superseded all other commodities as 
money, but they do not differ in their essential char- 
acteristics of desirableness in themselves (either for 
utility or ornament) from those other commodities 
which in ruder times, among more primitive people, 
were equally entitled to the appellation money. 

It does not need a moment's thought to satisfy us 
that it was by a true survival of the fittest that gold and 
silver finally obtained universal recognition as money, 
and superseded all other forms of it. 

Bear skins were universally desired, both for com- 
fort and ornament, but too long kept they were liable 
to moth and mildew, and their value was thus dimin- 
ished or destroyed. Cattle were liable to disease and 
death, and were expensive to care for. Finally, cop- 
per, iron, and brass were too easily produced and 
united in themselves the disadvantages of bulk as well 
as weight, with small value. Silver and gold are not 
easily destroyed. They are almost infinitely divisible, 
their purity or fineness is readily determined. As so- 
ciety has developed, their desirability for use and 
ornament has not diminished. Since they are prac- 
tically indestructible, easily hidden and guarded, they 
of all things are the most convenient for their pos- 
sessor to keep for such future needs of exchange for 
other things as he maj' then desire. 

With this general statement thus made, I will ask 
and answer a few questions, which will lead by the 
shortest route to the end of my subject. 

Question. Would not some other thing than silver 
or gold have been just as useful, just as exchangeable, 
and just as much entitled to the name of money, if 
these had not been selected ? 

Answer. Yes, perhaps so. But it is sufficient that 
these two Society has adopted, and in such a matter 
the individual may well go with the crowd. 

Q. Ought there not to be more money in circula- 
tion ? Is the:e now enough for the wants of trade ? 

A. The question cannot be answered by either an 
absolute Yes or No. 



In the beginning, — if in such a matter there could 
be a definite point of beginning, — the quantity would 
have been of no consequence, or, in the words of Bon- 
amy Price, "Any would have been enough, because 
the price of things would have become related to the 
volume of money, whether that volume were great or 
small ; and once established in their fair relation to 
each other through their common relation to money, 
it would make no difference whether their price was 
what we would now call high or low. But the truly 
ideal money would increase in -a ratio commensurate 
to the increase of things to be exchanged, minus the 
quickness of exchange which time might bring. 

It is not probable that either gold or silver, or both 
in use together as the bimetalists desire, would form 
the ideal money. In this sublunary sphere, the ideal 
is seldom reached. 

I am not aware of any well-ascertained data by 
which the quest on, Is there money enough ? can be 
definitely answered. There has been an increase in 
volume within the last fifteen years much greater in 
ratio than the ratio of increase in the volume of things 
to be exchanged. There are those who affirm that 
there is not half enough. My own opinion is, that 
there is enough ; that the price of things has become 
related to the existing stock, and that with the eco- 
nomics that have been secured and will no doubt be 
further gained in the use of money, there need be no 
present fear of a proper supply. A reasonable amount 
of good money is better than a larger supply of an in- 
ferior kind, since either have to be bought and paid 
for by honest labor. 

Q. Would silver and gold be now rightly entitled 
to the name of money, if they were not coined at the 
mint and the value of the coin determined by /mc ? 

A. Yes. They would exchange as freely as now, 
and would then as now, be entitled in every sense but 
a technical legal sense, to the name of money. The 
coinage does not give the metal any value that the 
metal did not before possess. The law determines 
the fineness and quantity which a given coin shall 
contain ; gives a name to the various coins respec- 
tively, and therefore treats of them as money, not 
recognising in its phraseology gold and silver in the 
form of bullion as money. But as bullion is as readily 
exchanged, and (in international trade) more to be 
desired than coin, and as the value of the coin derives 
its power from the quantity and fineness of the metal 
it contains, and not from the stamp of the Government 
machine, I repeat that essentially gold and silver bull- 
ion are as much entitled to the name of money before 
being coined into dollars, or sovereigns, or francs, as 

I know that here is a vital point of dispute ; that 
because the law in speaking of money treats only of 

what it has stamped as such, philosophers are able to 
confuse us very much by attributing to the stamp the 
money value which really lies under it. 

The law recognises, gives sanction, or forbids, but 
it is powerless to create. 

Q. Does not the legal-tender sanction which the 
law places upon the issues of its mint, give a new and 
original value to such legal tender coin ? 

A. No. The laws of legal tender give a stand- 
ing interpretation to the language of a contract, 
where such words as dollars, pounds, francs are 
used, and thus notifies both parties to a contract in 
advance, of what the law will require if they fall into 

Q. Must it then be denied that, under no condi- 
tion, nor within any limits, the legal-tender quality 
conferred upon a thing gives that thing a value which 
it would not otherwise have ? 

A. No. I admit, for argument's sake at least, that 
if the government should decree that doughnuts shall 
be legal tender for debts, a doughnut for a dollar, 
then (if doughnuts did not become too plentiful) they 
would be largely enhanced in value while they were 
in demand to satisfy existing contracts or pay existing 
debts, but I do say that as under such conditions alL 
existing contracts would be soon cancelled and no new 
ones created, except upon the basis of the natural 
exchangeable value of doughnuts, they would soon 
cease to be in demand, and possessing in themselves 
only the value of doughnuts, they would sink back to 
their natural doughnut value. But the operation 
sketched ought not to be recognised as a creation of 
value, even of a temporary kind. It is really a robbing 
under the guise of law. Governments can confiscate 
and destroy — they cannot create value. 

Q. How, then, is it that 41 2 1 grains of silver, 
coined into a silver dollar, will exchange in the market 
for 25Jij grains of gold, while as bullion, the same 
quantity of silver will only exchange for about two- 
thirds of as much gold ? 

A. There is one simple answer which completely 
explains the disparity. Great ingenuity is displayed 
in making some other explanation — scientific perhaps, 
but hard to comprehend. The one I submit is sim- 
ple ; any one can understand it, viz. : 

For some years past and at the present time, the 
United States Government has been, and is, in the re- 
ceipt of an income through tariff duties and excise 
dues, of about $1,500,000 per day. This large revenue 
it disburses in payment of the interest and towards 
the principal of its debt, for pensions, and general ad- 
ministration expense. Upon its debts, and to whom- 
soever desires, it pays gold coin on the basis of "iS-x^ 
grains to the dollar. From whomsoever desires to 
pay money into the treasury through the excise dues. 



it will receive as of equal value gold coin or silver dol- 
lars containing 412J grains each. Thus it practically 
buys that amount of coined silver, giving in considera- 
tion an exemption from the payment of 25/^ coined 
gold. If it would receive nickels or dimes in satisfac- 
tion of such dues in a similar way, they would become 
exchangeable for about a dollar in gold each, if it 
were certain that the government could continue thus 
to receive them with one hand, while with the other 
it continued to pay, as now, in gold. The operation 
is in fact a virtual exchange to the extent the commu- 
nity now desires, of gold coin and silver coins on the 
basis of their (theoretical) legal value, instead of their 
commercial or natural relative value. The difference 
some one now does, or will hereafter, pay. 

Q. Cannot the government continue this forever, 
and thus forever preserve a higher value to the silver 
coin than its equivalent in silver bullion? 

A. No. Because with the continued coinage of sil- 
ver in the present ratio of the coinage of gold, about 
three to one — that is to say, fifty-four millions of sil- 
ver, against say twenty millions of gold, per annum — 
the proportion of silver payment to the government 
will steadily increase, until the treasury department 
will be obliged to either pay in silver or buy gold in 
exchange for it. With free coinage of silver, this 
result will be the sooner reached. 

Whenever the government is thus compelled to 
suspend its present course in the respect just pointed 
out, the real commercial relation between the gold 
and silver coin will begin to appear. Then silver coin 
and silver bullion (coinage being free) of the same 
weight and fineness, will be alike in value, the same 
as gold coin and gold bullion now are. 

Q. Then you do not believe that the free coinage 
of silver as now proposed, would enhance the value of 
silver bullion, and restore the old relations of 16 to i 
between gold and silver ? 

A. Free coinage of silver would no doubt give to 
41 2| grains of silver bullion ^^ fine, as much value, 
i. e. purchasing power, as would be contained in the 
coined dollar ; and if the government or some other 
power rich enough, would forever give gold for silver 
in the ratio of i to 16, then the old rates of 16 to i 
could ^e maintained. But we have already perceived 
(if it be the truth) that our government cannot do 
this. It may be added, that so long as the govern- 
ment is willing to accept silver at a fixed ratio, thus 
creating an artificial value for it higher than its nat- 
ural value, silver will, as sure as water seeks its level, 
flow from all parts of this country and also from for- 
eign countries into the United States Treasury driving 
out the gold, and the government will have to pay the 
difference. Even if the government had the financial 
ability to bear the loss, it would be a foolish use to 

make of it, since all its power is derived from the peo- 
ple, and is used at their cost. 

The fact is, that the value of all things — that is, 
their exchangeable quality for other things — is deter- 
mined, and ought to be determined, by the free play 
of human action. Efforts made by powerful bodies, 
governments, corporations^ syndicates, or trusts, to 
interfere with the free action of men in these regards, 
is injurious to all. The statement is as true when ap- 
plied to gold and silver as it is of other things. Neither 
gold nor silver have value different in kind or differ- 
ently derived, from other things. They are good for 
use and ornament. They will exchange for other 
things ; but the relation in which thej^ will exchange 
for other things, never continues for anj' long period 
the same. Nor is there anything in their nature by 
which (under any rule that can be stated) they should, 
in law or morals, continue to exchange for things in a 
fixed ratio to each other, of 15 to i, or 16 to i, or any 
other ratio. In fact, except within nominal limits, 
they never have thus been practically related. In > 
every country where the effort has been made to make 
a fixed ratio practically operative, that effort has finally 
failed.* One of the two metals has always been the 
real money of account, the real instrument of exchange 
in the great industrial movements ; the other has oper- 
ated in an auxiliary and subordinate capacity. Per- 
ceiving this to be the fact. Great Britain in 1816 gave 
up the experiment, made gold the sole money of ac- 
count, and coined silver for subordinate use only. 

In our own country, from 1792 to 1873 our mints 
were open to the free coinage of silver and gold, part 
of the time in the ratio of 15 to i, and part of the time in 
the ratio of 16 to i ; but in the whole period of 80 
years, only 8 millions in silver dollars were coined. 
The mints of Mexico and Japan are both open to gold, 
but silver being the only medium of exchange, alone 
goes to the mint. 

The Latin Union, so-called, made a league, limit- 
ing the coinage of silver, hoping thus to preserve in 
practice a theoretic ratio ; but they were obliged to 
break it, and suspend coinage of one of the metals. 

If we wished to secure the free exchange of these 
metals in a fixed ratio, it would be necessary to make 
an agreement with all commercial nations of the world. 
No doubt the silver producing countries would gladly 
agree. We could well afford to. In 1850 this country 
produced silver to the value of $50,000. In 1890, the 

*The ancient historians tell us of early times in Arabia and in Germany 
when silver was worth the same as gold, weight for weight. The ratio fixed 
by Spain in 1497 was 10^.; to i. Then in 154C, being dominant in the world of 
commerce and finance, she fixed the ratio at 13' 2 to 1. In the next century 
li6S8l one hundred years after the defeat of the Spanish Armada, Portugal, 
then prosperous, wealthy, and dominant, fixed the governing ratio at 16 to i. 
Then in 1717 England fixed hers at 15.02 to i : France in 172G at 14'2 to i : Spain 
in 1775 at i5'2 to i in the Peninsula, though 16 remained the ratio in her Amer- 
ican colonies. In 1785 and 1803 France adopted the Spanish ratio of 15' 2 to i 



annual product was about fifty millions gold value. 
But there is much reason to doubt that non-silver pro- 
ducing countries would enter into such a compact. 
Great Britain certainly will not. 

Well, then ! If it be impossible to maintain the 
practical use of two kinds of money like silver and 
gold in a fixed ratio, which of the two is it the wiser 
to use? 

The answer must depend on circumstances. If a 
country is insulated from others, has no commercial 
relations outside its own boundaries, and desires to 
establish none ; then it may be said that it is quite an 
indifferent matter which of the two shall be the rec- 
ognised money. Either will do. But if a country 
has trade and commerce beyond its own bounda- 
ries, and desires to encourage and extend such trade, 
then its interests require the use of that money which 
is current in the market where its foreign trade is set- 
tled. At the present time that market is Great Britain. 

If the United States of America is to take that po- 
sition in the World's progress, which we confidently 
hope for, it must be by the extension of its trade and 
commerce with other parts of the world. Whatever 
favors this, favors our Nation's development. What- 
ever hinders this, restricts and hampers our progress. 
At the present time, and for an indefinite period in 
the future, all our foreign commerce, amounting now 
to fifteen hundred millions of dollars per annum, is of 
necessity, transacted under the English standard of 
gold, for London is the settling-house were all these 
foreign payments are made. If we ship flour to Brazil, 
we must take our pay in London. If we buy sugar 
from Cuba, we must pay in London. If in our do- 
mestic affairs we degenerate to the silver basis, as we 
certainly will if the present compulsory coinage of sil- 
ver goes on, or if those who seek to open our mines 
for the free and unlimited coinage of silver shall have 
their way, we shall then have voluntarily surrendered 
the standard that puts us on a parity with other com- 
mercial nations in the struggle for the world's trade, 
and shall have adopted a standard, whether theoretic- 
ally superior or not, which will put our foreign trade 
and commerce in a most disadvantageous position. 

So far in these remarks, I have not made any ref- 
erence to paper money, so-called. What I have now 
to say, can be soon stated. There is a distinct and 
radical difference between gold and silver money, or 
any commodity used as money, and paper money. 
There ought to be a clearer distinction in the names 
applied to them. Gold and silver, (not to speak of 
absolute forms of money,) are real money. They carry 
their exchangeable value in themselves. Paper money 
derives all its power from its relation to real money. 
It has no value in itself, can serve no purpose either 
of use or ornament. Paper money is a promise, an 

order, a warrant, which entitles the holder to real 
money when asked for by him. Thus related and kept 
effective, paper money is an immense economy. By 
its use, a considerable portion of an otherwise larger 
stock of real money can be exchanged, for things 
which directly minister to human needs. 

I might speak also of checks, drafts, bills of ex- 
change, and promissory notes, which in modern times 
operate in the exchange of commodities. They might 
be called, one or two degrees removed, a kind of paper 
money. They perform in a limited way, the same 
functions that paper money performs in a larger way; 
and like paper money, they economise the use of real 
money. Economise it as they may however, they 
connot wholly supersede it — certainly not in this or in 
any immediately following generation. 


by richard andree. 

As the most essential motives to anthropophagy 
must always be placed superstition — be it a religious or 
a secular sort — and revenge. These two we find spread 
everywhere and in fact strikingly so where cannibal- 
ism exists. Wherever prisoners of war are regarded 
as booty we find the handsomest and bravest and those 
prominent through their position eaten first. Canni- 
balism limits itself to the eating of separate parts; 
thus it is the ej^es, the heart, the brain which are pre- 
ferred, because they are the seat of the virtues, the 
bravery and the strength of the one to be consumed; 
and these the conqueror wishes to make his own. Thus 
also is explained the fact that often anthropophagy is 
a special right exercised by chiefs or chosen warriors, 
who alone are said to partake of the favor so as to 
strengthen and increase their moral qualities by such 
means. This happens sometimes in a sublime way, 
so to speak, among peoples who have perhaps no di- 
rect enjoyment of human flesh but who still wish to 
acquire from it the supposed moral gain. Thus the 
South American Tarianas and Tucanos do not directly 
eat the flesh of the dead in order to acquire the qual- 
ities and virtues of the deceased, but lay the body 
first for a month in the earth. Then they dig up the 
corpse from the earth and dry it to a crisp mass over 
a fire. This mass is pulverized, mixed with caxfi-i and 
drunken.* When the fetichman of the Ashantees de- 
vours the heart of a captured enemy, he does it in or- 
der not to be tormented by the spirit of the dead of 
which he assumes that the seat is in the heart. The 
Lamas on the Amazon River eat the marrow of the 
bones of their dead because they imagine that thereby 
the souls of the dead enter their own bodies (Marcoy). 
The Dajaks according to Miillerf give boys the scalp 

* Wallace, Ainazon and Rio Ne^o, London, 1S53, 498. 
^ Allgeineine Ethnographic, 315. 



and the heart of fallen enemies to eat in order to make 
them brave and spirited. A Chippeway Indian woman 
for the same reason fed her children on the flesh of 
an Englishman (Long). Among the South Australians 
an older brother thought to acquire the physical 
strength of his younger brother if he ate him (Stan- 
bridge); in Queensland the mother devours her new- 
born babe under the impression that she will get back 
the strength drawn from her by her offspring (Angas), 
and she also believes that she honors the dead by 
eating them. The Maoris , according to Cook, fancj' 
that enemies who are eaten enter into eternal fire. 

Everywhere we see therefore how the belief in the 
existence of a soul, a special spiritual power in the 
person to be eaten, is to be regarded as the final cause 
of anthropophagy. The spirit and the virtues of the 
person eaten are thought by the enjoyment of human 
flesh to enter into the possession of the person eating, 
exactly as by the reception of other food increase in 
physical strength arises.* 

Closely connected with superstition is the other 
motive, revenge. This is most clearly and signifi- 
cantly shown us in the case of the Mesayas on the River 
Amazon, who after choking down with reluctance the 
flesh of slaughtered enemies vomit it up again (Mar- 
coy). The punishment is then completed, revenge is 
sufficiently satisfied and the use of human flesh in and 
for itself appears disgusting to the Mesayas. Wild 
revenge was also the cause of anthropophagy among 
the Caribs, and the most of them were sick after the 
use of it (Du Tertre). Among the Botokudos revenge 
acts in conjunction with hunger in leading them to 
eat enemies (Tschudi); and Pigafetta, Vespucci, and 
Hans Staden relate the same of the Tupi tribes on the 
east coast of South America. Here, as we know from 
Hans Staden, passion runs so far that the destroyer of 
a slain enemy takes his name in order thus, besides 
destrojang the body, to utterly obliterate his spiritual 
immortality. In a measure revenge is also the mo- 
tive among the Negroes of the Delta of the Nile (ac- 
cording to Crowther); this appears to be the sole mo- 
tive among the Manjnema in Central Africa (according 
to Livingstone). Revenge debased the Melanesians 
of the Solomon Islands and New Hebrides to canni- 
balism. It is the principal ground for anthropophagy 
among the Indians of America. 

Revenge has been formally brought into a system 
among a few peoples who regarded the eating of hu- 
man beings as an integral part of their legislation. 

* In parallel with this stands the belief widely spread among uncultured 
peoples that special animals or plants impart by their consumption special 
properties. I could adduce dozens of examples, but I mention only the Za- 
paros on the Napo in South America who eat. through preference, fish, monk- 
eys, and birds "in order to become quick and agile." They avoid, however, 
the flesh of clumsy animals like the tapir and peccari "that they may not be- 
come unwieldly like these." For that would be disastrous to a hunting people 
of the primeval forests. Journal Anthropol. Institute vol. 11, 503. 

The greatest punishment that can be meted out to an 
enemy or a transgressor consists in his being eaten. 
As a special example of this may be adduced, accord- . 
ing to the accounts of Junghuhn, the Batuas in Suma- 
tra ; besides the accounts referred to we may further 
state that some other tribes regard anthropophagy from 
the same point of view ; as for instance, the Kissama 
in West Africa according to Hamilton, and the New 
Caledonians according to Garnier. 

Anthropophagy seems to us to be most abhorrent 
in those places where every feeling is so deadened that 
the flesh of men is a pure delicacy or where it is eaten 
as commonly as any other kind of flesh. When — as 
different credible observers agree in relating — the 
Fans on the Gaboon and theObotschi on the Niger ex- 
hume and devour the corpses of strangers, we can find 
for this practice no palliation. Human flesh is then 
a ware just as among us other flesh is in the meat 
markets. Hutchinson saw it offered for sale in the 
markets on the Altkalabar in Korbea ; A. Vespucci and 
Pigafetta describe how it is preserved by smoking 
among the Tupi tribes; Monbottu, Abanga andNyam- 
Nyam, New Caledonians and Fiji Islanders are also 
to be ranked in this category of arch-cannibals ; they 
may always have had some other motive for their 
practice. Even more terrible, however, appears to us 
the eating of one's own children, as among the New 
Caledonians according to Garnier, among the Nyam- 
Nyam according to Schweinfurth, the Australians ac- 
cording to Angas, Stanbridge, and others. With this 
practice must not be confused the otherwise frequent 
practice of child-murder. 

It is still to be mentioned that among several peo- 
ples anthropophagy appears as the special right of 
certain classes. Among the Potawatomis, according 
to Keating, it was the privilege of a narrow brotherhood 
who seemed to be endowed with special heroic virtues ; 
among the Solomon Islanders the chief received as his 
regular portion a part of the body wrapped up in a 
banana leaf ; among the Tahiti an eye of the victim 
was presented to the king, who acted as if he would 
devour it, and the same is related of the Hawaiian 
Islanders. The last two cases are still to be seen as 
a survival of a once prevailing cannibalism which ex- 
isted generally though in a rudimentary form in Da- 
homey, where the king dips his finger in the blood of 
the slain victim and licks it ; in Ashantee where fetich- 
men still eat the hearts; in the Samoa and Tonga 
Islands and wherever in the absence of other reports 
we are obliged to assume the former existence of 

Many peoples shamelessl}' and freely show their 
anthropophagy, while in others there is no lack of in- 
dications that they are ashamed of the practice. 
This latter case, it will seem to us, is the beginning 



of giving up the terrible custom. The cannibal 
feasts are often held in secret, and Livingstone could 
under no condition obtain admission to such a banquet 
of the Manjnema. Grifeon du Bellay states that the 
Fans held their feasts of human flesh in secret and ex- 
cluded the children from them. This latter was the 
case among the Markesans ; here, however, as was 
more generally the custom, the women were likewise 
excluded from taking part in the matter. The Maoris 
admitted only prominent women. 

It is pleasing now to see how anthropophagy is 
more and more losing ground, and how even in the 
short space of historical time which has passed since 
the great periods of discovery cannibalism has disap- 
peared throughout a very considerable space. It has 
not always been the influence of white settlers or the 
zeal of missionaries that has brought about the extinc- 
tion of the evil; tribes have succeeded in giving up 
their cannibalistic customs by themselves without for- 
eign interference. Among many Polynesians — where 
traces may to-day be found of the former existence of 
anthropophagy — it had disappeared or was on the 
wane when white men first entered their islands as in 
Tahiti, Hawaii, the Navigator Islands and in Microne- 
sia. Without doubt the inhabitants of the Malayan 
Archipelago were once commonly anthropophagous ; 
to-day it is only with difficulty that we can find there 
traces of this primitive custom or remains of it. In- 
deed in many places anthropophagy has died out with 
the people themselves. For instance where only a 
hundred years ago in the region of the great North 
American lakes anthropophagous redskins devoted 
themselves to the chase, bound their enemies to the 
war pole, dismembered and ate them, the English race 
has spread overflowing the land. On the plateaus of 
Anahuac where once to the world-soul bloody human 
sacrifice together with cannibalistic banqueting were 
offered, the same Indian people live to-day having given 
up with their language, their old customs and anthro- 
pophagy, and been brought within the pale of our civili- 
zation. It is strange that there have not been wanting 
defenders of anthropophagy. Zeno, Diogenes, Chrysip- 
pus, and Montaigne exculpated it on moral grounds.* 
George Forster believes a favorable word should be 
said for it. " However repulsive it may be to our 
education," says he, "it is still in and of itself neither 
unnatural nor criminal to eat human flesh. Only for 
this reason is it to be banned and barred : because the 
social feelings of human love and sympathy can thus 
so easily be lost. But since without these feelings no 
human society can exist, the first step in culture among 
all peoples must have been this : to abolish the eating 
of human beings, to excite a detestation for it."! 

* Winwood Reade. Savage Africa, 158. 

\ SiimmtUche Schriften. Leipsic, 1843. I. 407. 


A VERY interesting journal is TIii; Neiv Nation which Mr. 
Edward Bellamy has just launched upon the turbalent sea of 
American debate. If continued on the plan of the first number 
7V/t' New Nation will be a valuable addition to the educational 
forces of the country. It is enthusiastic, sympathetic, and full of 
useful information. It is rather sectarian in tone, having its own 
" ism " and creed, but perhaps none the worse on that account, 
for isms and creeds are spiritual stimulants that sometimes tear 
up conservative mountains and fling them into the sea. Mr. Bel- 
lamy with fervid rhetoric describes the coming state, when all 
the people, having no longer any use for liberty, shall become ab- 
sorbed into that beatific Nirvana known as " Government." That 
seems to be his dream of a new nation. He justly censures the 
animalism and greed of our present social system, but he does not 
seem to know how much of its unnatural selfishness is due to the 
patronage jind paternalism of "government." These more than 
any other causes are helping to divide our people into beasts of 
burthen and beasts of prey. Does he ever think hbw many of the 
monopolies he complains of are created and fed by "govern- 
ment"? There may be too little Nationalism in some places, but 
certainly there is too much of it in others. 

-X- ^ * 

The contraction of liberty and the expansion of nationalism 
are clearly shown in the ten thousand bills introduced this winter 
into our state legislatures, to say nothing of the laws enacted or 
proposed by congress. To "have a law passed" appears to be 
the ambition of every man, and of every interest, from the mil- 
lionaire ship owner, or mill owner, or mine owner, to the hod 
carrier and the shoveler. Men are nd longer supposed to be of 
age at twenty-one, nor even at forty-one. In the very pride of 
their strength and manhood they are placed under the guardian- 
ship of " government." Government must make their contracts 
for them, feed them with a spoon, and attend to all their business. 
In California, for instance, hundreds of bills have been introduced 
of which the following are specimens worthy of careful study : 
one, making the employment of persons not American citizens by 
contractors or sub-contraclors a misdemeanor ; another, making 
it unlawful to offer less than two dollars per day to unskilled la- 
borers hired to work for the municipalities or the State ; another, 
requiring that employers shall give three hours on election day to 
all their employes ; and another, to establish a trout hatchery near 
San Francisco. The superstition is becoming general among us 
that " Government " lives up in the sky, that it has accumulated 
stores of impossible blessings to shower down upon its favorites, 
and that it has a guardian angel in the shape of a policeman to 
protect and care for every citizen. Independence is fDecoming a 
burthen to us, so we pray for masters to take us into their keep- 
ing, put our wills into harness, and guide our feeble minds. 


■K- * 

The tendency of this Nationalistic legislation is made clearer 
to us by the actual bills themselves than by any quantity of ab- 
stract moralizing on their character, the general inclination being 
to surrender thought, will, and action into the keeping of our 
grandmother the government. In Pennsylvania is a bill to enable 
barber shops to keep open on Sunday, and in South Dakota is a 
bill to compel barber shops to remain closed on Sunday, a matter 
which it seems might properly be left by Dakota and Pennsyl- 
vania to the laws of health and cleanliness, without interfering 
with the liberty of barbers. In Illinois is a bill to pay a bounty 
of one cent a pound on all the sugar made in the Stale from sor- 
ghum, beet, or maple, while Nebraska has a bill to repeal that 
bounty. In Wisconsin is a bill compelling the payment of em- 
ployes weekly, in Missouri a bill to compel mine owners to pay 
their employes every ten days, and in New Jersey a bill requiring 
hired persons to be paid fortnightly, with a Saturday half holiday 



thrown in, our kind and meddlesome old grandmother the State 
assuming that the citizens are not yet of age, and therefore not 
capable of making contracts for themselves In Indiana is a bill 
to prevent the playing of base ball on Sunday, and another com- 
pelling managers of State institutions to purchase lui/ivL- live stock 
for consumption ; and in Dakota is a similar bill to encourage the 
use of iin/ire coal in state institutions. In Illinois is a bill allow- 
ing three cents to every inhabitant who kills an English sparrow, 
and in Indiana a bill giving a bounty of one cent for the scalp of 
that pugnacious bird, the consequence of which discrimination 
will be that the Indiana sparrow killer will send his birds over 
into Illinois where the bounty will be three cents per scalp. 
* " # 
The multiplication of statutory crimes is a disagreeable feature 
of the new nation we are so industriously building up ; felonies with- 
out any moral evil, and misdemeanors innocent of injury, the free 
efforts of men to promote their own individual happiness. For 
example, in New York, besides the laws against voting too much, 
there are bills to punish men for voting tco little, the penalty for 
declining to vote being fi.xed in the proposed bill at twenty five 
dollars. In Kansas it is proposed to "have a law passed" making 
it a felony to act as a lobbyist, or to employ an agent to secure 
the passage of any measure ; and a bill is now before the legisla- 
ture creating this new felony. In Missouri are bills making it a 
misdemeanor to sell tobacco in any form to minors, or to employ 
a locomotive engineer who has not had three years experience, or 
for any physician to compound prescriptions unless he is regis- 
tered as a pharmacist. So also in Minnesota it will be a misde- 
meanor for any "incompetent person" to engage in plumbing, or 
dentistry, or in the business of a veterinary surgeon. A glance 
at the bills introduced this winter into our state legislatures will 
show an attempt to create five thousand new crimes, very few of 
them being mala in se. This multiplication of offenses means the 
multiplication of policemen, detectives, courts, and piisons. If 
only a tenth of those bills should become laws, judicial oppression 
and police tyranny would be increased to an intolerable degree, 
and espionage would become prime minister of the law. 

While the new nation carries punishment in one hand, it be- 
stows patronage with the other. It repeals our promises, modi- 
fies our agreements, and insures us against bad luck. In Nebraska 
is a bill forbidding any person to acquire over three hundred and 
twenty acres of land. In Illinois is a bill requiring all butter and 
cheese made from oleomargerine or cotton seed oil to be colored 
pink. In North D&kota is a bill to indemnify farmers losing crops 
by hail. In Minnesota is a bill exempting all manufacturing es- 
tablishments from taxation, and another for distributing seed 
grain to farmers whose crops were destroyed by hail, storm, or 
blight. This is accompanied by a bill repealing the bounty for 
killing wolves. It has been discovered that this bounty, three 
dollars a scalp in certain months, and five dollars a scalp in others, 
acted as a premium on wclf growing, and made it more profitable 
in some parts of Minnesota to raise wolves than sheep, so the com- 
plaint is made that " wolf-farming " has become an "industry." 
It was also discovered that young wolves captured in the three- 
dollar months were carefully preserved until the five dollar months 
came around. So the state law for the extermination of wolves 
having multiplied their cumbers, it is proposed to repeal it alto- 
gether. The same experience will follow the indemnification for 
the loss of wheat by hail, storm, or blight. After a few years, the 
law having multiplied hailstorms in Minnesota it will be repealed 

like the bounty on wolves. 

* * 

A portentous rumbling was heard last Sunday week in Chi- 
cago, It came from that throbbing volcano known as " Organised 
Labor." There was a debate in the Trades and Labor Assembly 

over the employment of non-union men by the Directory of the 
World's Columbian Exposition, the Assembly declaring that none 
but Union men should be employed, and threatening riot and re- 
bellion should their demands be disregarded and their commands 
disobeyed. One member sprung to his feet and shouted, "We 
will make the Directory put a regiment of soldiers around their 
grounds if they employ scab labor." The meaning of that is plain, 
" No man outside our society shall be permitted to earn bread for 
his wife and children by working for the World's Fair. Should 
he attempt to do so we w-ill prevent him by violence." This is a 
usurpation of power for the sake of social injustice, Suppose that 
" Unorganised Labor " should make a similar threat! What right 
of proscription and punishment has one side more than the other? 
The threat of the Trades Assembly is a declaration of war, in 
which they may not have a monopoly of all the persecution. The 
right of working men to form themselves into Trades Unions is 
absolutely sacred, and ought to be vindicated at all hazards ; the 
right of workingmen not to join the Unions is equally sacred, and 
ought to have the same vindication. Our own slavery begins the 
very moment we attempt to enslave others. No "organised" 
members, though including all mankind except one man, can ac- 
quire the right to deprive that one of his liberty. 

The first eruption of the volcano called " Organised Labor " 
occurred a few days after the warlike declaration of the Trades 
Assembly. It was not very fiery or destructive, but there was a 
promise in it of a shower of cinders heavy enough to bury another 
Herculaneum. Some Italian laborers employed to dig on the 
grounds of the World's Fair, were set upon by " Organised La- 
bor," beaten, and driven from their work. The excuse for it all 
was that those poor men were Italians, or in the language of their 
assailants, " Dagos, " having no right to work for a living in this 
land. There was a good deal of comic irony in the performance 
when a lot of organised foreigners declared that in this National 
and International testimonial to an Italian, no Italian should have 
part, nor be allowed to work on the tributary buildings to be 
erected in honor of Columbus. If this kind of petty persecution 
is to be continued the Italian government will very likely decline 
to take any part whatever in the Columbian Exposition. 

M. M. Truimbull. 



7'0 the Editor of The Open Court. — 

Your article " Questions of Agnosticism " reminds me of sev- 
eral things I have seen in your paper upon the same term and what 
it is said to mean, and I admit that I write this because I am angry 
with you for what I have no better expression than your dishonesty 
in writing about it, 

I know something of what the human mind is and I can al- 
most plead guilty to the worship of Matthew Arnold's gentle God of 
Tendency, and I sometimes rival David in the hope that this God 
will make haste and do something for human intelligence and in- 
tellectual honesty and con.sistency. But as to Agnosticism, there 
are three kinds, are there ? Is that true ? or the statement honest ? 
You know how the term originated and what it was coined to con- 

If I am asked is there a God who created the universe and 
conirols and manages it, I answer I don't know, and you say it is 

If asked will men live another life in another world after death 
in this, how is it pessimistit: ? I answer the modest truth that I 
havn't fcund out. Now these and kindred questions are those to 
which the term was originally intended to apply and it has always 



been so understood and used by all honest writers— so there can 
be no three kinds of agnostics, either wise or simple, to talk about. 
Agnosticism simply means intellectual honesty. 

Your assumption (and that of Don Piat and certain Catholic 
priests) that agnosticism is in some way an assumption of knowl- 
edge when it professes ignorance is unfounded, unfair and ridic- 

Grand Rapids, Mich. Ira Y. Bornham. 

[The preachers of dogmatic religion have often— and not with- 
out cause— been declared guilty of stigmatising ail who do not be- 
lieve as they do, as dishonest. There are, however, agnostics who in 
mpffe of their opposition to orthodox religion resemble the dog- 
' matist in zealous intolerance and narrow-mindedness as much as 
one egg resembles another. There is no objection to Mr. Burn- 
ham's " I do not know," but there is a great objection to the pro- 
position that no one can know. Concerning Mr. Burnham's as- 
surance "I know something of what the human mind is," we take 
the liberty of reserving our doubts. Ed ] 


To the F.dilofof The Open Court:— 

This question is. I understand, soon to be decided by a com- 
mittee of residents of Chicago, and I should like to see it discussed 
fully in The Open Court. I should particularly like to know how 
much truth there is in the story that the Centennial Exhibition, in 
1876 at Philadelphia, though nominally closed against visitors, was 
really open to any one who chose to pay for being passed in by an 
exhibitor. Poor people and strangers who had no friends were 
shut out, while rich Philadelphians made up Sunday parties in 
order to see the show without being annoyed by vulgar crowds. 
That is the way Sunday laws generally work ; and I don't want to 
have any such favoritism at the Columbian Exposition. Governor 
"Willey, of Idaho, is right in saying that this Fair should be kept 
open for the "benefit of the poor people in Chicago : they will 
find things of more than usual interest in and about the grounds, 
that will tend to elevate their standard and keep them from the 
saloons." F. M. Holland. 

Autliorised translation. In two volumes. Boxed and Elegantly Bound. 
Price, S4.00. The Open Court Pub. Co., Chicago. 



For the Family, School, Profos^sion,''.! or Privatq Library. 

Fully Abreast of tJie Times. 

No doubt can exist as to its entire .idpquacy fur the uses to 
which it has been so carefully and skilllully prepared.— iVero 
York Tribune. 


Our Destiny. The Influence of Nationalism on Morals and Re- 
ligion. An Essay in Ethics. By Laurence Gronlund, A.M. 
Boston ; Lee & Shepard. 

This book is a revised and enlarged version of a series of ar- 
ticles published in The .Vationeilist. Its author believes that so- 
cialism, which is to be inaugurated not by violence, but by enthu- 
siasm, will establish, virtually, the kingdom of heaven on earth, 
and it will evolve an irresistible belief in God and immortality. 
Mr. Gronlund says : " I hold that, though it be perhaps a fact that 
a majority of those who are called Socialists are avowed Atheists, 
yet Atheism is not an integral part of Socialism, but merely an ac- 
cretion upon it, like tartar upon the enamel of the teeth. Such 
are Atheists, not because they are Socialists, but because they are 
Frenchmen and Germans. Nationalism is eminently religious." 


Mr. W. L. Sheldon of St. Louis has published a thoughtful 
and spirited address on the subject : " How far is it right to make 
happiness the chief aim of life ?" His advice is, " not to go seek- 
ing for happiness, for that is just the way to lose what chance 
there is of finding it," and he bases this rule upon the considera- 
tion that "happiness is not the chief aim of life. . . . Joy is the 
accompaniment and not the aim. If we make it the aim, we lose 
it even as the accompaniment." 

The Authentic " Unabridged," comprising issnes 
of 1864. '79 and '84, (still copyrighted), is now 
Thoroughly Revised and Enlarged, under the super- 
vision ofNoah Porter, D. I).. H. 1)., of Yale Universi- 
ty, and as a distinguishing title, bears the name of 

WEBSTER'S International Dictionary. 

Editorial work on this revision has been in active 
progress for over TEN YEARS, not less tlian One 
Hundred paid editorial laborers having been en- 
gaged upon it, and not less than 8300,000 having 
been expended before the first copy "was printed. 

Critical comparison with any other Dictionary is 
invited. GET THE BEST. 

Sold by all Booksellers. Illustrated Pamphlet free. 

G. & C. MERRIAM &. CO., Publishers, 




$2.00 PER ■yEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 


(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 




Richard Andree 2718 

CURRENT TOPICS. "The new Nation" J.nd Nation- 
alism. Gen. M. M. Trumbull 2720 



NOTES 2722 

The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion Avith Science. 

No. 184. (Vol. V.-2) 

CHICAGO, MARCH 5, 1891. 

( Two Dollars per Yea 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



In 1849, when the naturalist Burmeister visited 
the Brazilian province of Matto-Grosso, he saw the 
natives cut down their woods by thousands of acres in 
order to get pasture-land for their cattle, and predicted 
that the denuded soil would soon bristle with thorn- 
shrubs much harder to extirpate than the trees of the 
primeval forest. 

When the natural connection of moral causes and 
effects shall have been more clearly recognised, poli- 
ticians may predict with similar confidence that the 
suppression of harmless amusements will always re- 
sult in promoting the introduction of less harmless 
pastimes. North or South, human nature remains the 
same ; the love of excitement, in its normal forms, is 
one of the healthiest instincts of the human mind, but 
under diflficulties will satisfy itself the best way it can, 
and can be much more easily perverted than sup- 

Under the rule of the Bourbons the lot of the 
poorer classes in the kingdom of Naples was in sev- 
eral respects much more wretched than that of abso- 
lute savages who enjoy at least the rough freedom of 
the wilderness. Taxes from which many nobles and a 
host of clerical drones remained exempt, had increased 
to an extent that made life to thousands of workmen 
a constant struggle for the bare necessities of exist- 
ence. The right of free assembly had been restricted 
by a multitude of oppressive by-laws. Foot-races and 
vintage-festivals were interdicted to prevent their 
abuse for purposes of political agitation. Hunting 
was made a privilege of the rich. No man could shoot 
a quail on his own patch of farmland without first pre- 
paying the price of a monthly hunting-permit that 
would have swallowed the proceeds of a month's labor. 
The poor were robbed of their panes, as well as of 
their circenses : tax-collectors fleeced them of their 
wages, and omnipresent police-spies prevented them 
from enjoying, even at their own expense, the outdoor 
sports which the Caesars provided freely as the price 
of curtailed liberties. In the darkest da)'S of that des- 
potism the ministers of the autocrat were alarmed by 
the rise of a secret society known as the Camorra : a 
league of conspirators who ranged the country after 
dark and seized and enjoyed in a lawless manner what 

the laws prevented them from obtaining in a better 
way. Their favorite prey was the hoard of a tyrannous 
revenue official, but they also plundered convents, 
country-seats and even the cottages of peasants whom 
they suspected of having furnished information to the 
police. Between 1825 and i860 not less than forty- 
two thousand notorious robberies were committed by 
members of the society {La Camorra, Notizie Storiche, 
Florence, 1863), besides many other crimes and count- 
less petty thefts. The night-roving conspirators were 
always prepared to assist each other and to meet re- 
sistance by deeds of violence ; many expeditions were, 
indeed, undertaken for the special purpose of revenge, 
not only without any prospect of plunder, but with 
the certainty of incurring heavy expenses in behalf of 
imprisoned accomplices. The net proceeds of a week's 
work were paid into a common fund, which again was 
evenly distributed among the members at monthly in- 
tervals and spent with a freedom which made Camor- 
rists the most popular visitors of the Neapolitan pleas- 
ure-resorts. As far as possible they tried to limit their 
raids to the houses of unpopular persons and thus 
managed to preserve the good will of the poor, poor 
peasant-boys and journeymen artisans having often no 
higher ambition than the hope of being admitted to 
the league of the secret brotherhood though that ad- 
mission involved a long term of probation, and trea- 
son was always punished with death. 

"Nothing would, indeed, be more erroneous," says 
Sign. Monnier, "than to suppose that the Camorra 
was recruited chiefly from the depraved classes of so- 
ciety ; candidates for admission were generally poor, 
but they were the more respectable part of the poor 
working population and rarely absolute paupers. Ap- 
plicants for admission moreover had to prove that 
they had been guilty neither of espionage or theft ; 
also that none of their near female relatives were prosti- 
tutes. A Picciotto d' onore (novice admitted on word 
of honor) had to remain on probation for a year, shar- 
ing all the dangers and none of the profits of the ex- 
pedition, nevertheless the privilege of membership 
was coveted even by young aristocrats, either from a 
pure love of excitement or in the hope of getting op- 
portunities for revenge on an obnoxious government 
official. Candidates of wealth were always welcome 
but remained objects of suspicion till they had practi- 



cally proved the motive of their unusual desire. Sus- 
picion, even without positive proofs of guilt, was apt 
to lead to expulsion. At no time did the leaders of 
the society countenance the practice of admitting can- 
didates of unknown precedents." 

The Camorra reached the zenith of its power under 
the rule of Francis II, when it enjoyed the popularity 
of apolitical reform league — apopularity that increased 
in proportion to the increasing severity of the meas- 
ures adopted for the suppression of the society. Ban- 
ishments, imprisonment, and numerous executions all 
failed to answer their purpose, but the evil was finally 
cured by the removal of its cause and under the more 
equitable laws of the present government the Camorra 
is fading away like the Vehm-Gerichte of northern 
Germany disappeared under the rule of the Protestant 

In the United States of America the despotism of 
the Sabbatarian by-laws would long ago have led to 
similar results, but for the modifying influence of two 
causes : The abundance of field-sports and the liber- 
ality of the wage rates that enable thousands of sport- 
deprived city-dwellers to drown their ennui in alcohol. 
In Baltimore, St. Louis, and Philadelphia rum and 
beer operate as so many narcotic antidotes of the Sun- 
day law evil, and the effectual suppression of Sunday- 
tippling might therefore be apt to lead to entirely un- 
expected results. In the hill-states the victims of the 
Sabbath-bigot indemnify themselves by field-sports. 
Offers of "rewards for the detection of hunting on the 
Lord's day" are in vain ; from 6 to 9 A. M., and again 
from 4 P. M. to sunset, the voice of the squirrel-rifle 
is heard in the land on every fair-weather Sunday, the 
year round ; game laws are quietly ignored, and in- 
formers would risk to get the wages of their zeal in 
the form of buck-shot. Those who really scruple 
about Sunday-sport and who, withal, have to work 
every day in the week, adopt the expedient of night- 
hunting. "Coons" can be found better in night-time 
than in daylight ; foxes and opossums can be surprised 
in their nocturnal haunts by moonlight, and even in 
pitch dark nights deer can be decoyed by the gleam 
of a torch. In wooded mountain-regions the game- 
supply is practically as inexhaustible as the fisheries 
of the ocean. 

But the case differs in lowland-regions at a distance 
from the sea-coast and from the shores of the large in- 
land lakes. Indiana was all a wilderness a hundred 
years ago, and the settlement of Kansas did not begin 
in earnest till 1840; yet in many counties of those 
states game, large and small, has been far more 
thoroughly extirpated than in any part of game-law 
protected, old Europe. There are districts that could 
be measured by hundreds of square miles, where the 
best sportsman, aided by a pack of the best trained 

hounds, might spend days in the vain attempt to scare 
up a rabbit or a partridge. Deer have long disap- 
peared from the neighborhood of the best-settled coun- 
ties, and turkeys are seen only at long intervals in the 
solitudes of the comparatively well-wooded northern 
districts of Indiana. 

What are the sport-loving settlers of the southern 
parishes to do ? Sunday amusements in their village 
are out of the question ; athletic pastimes are not en- 
couraged by the orthodox educators of the young and 
would interfere with the weekday's work of their elders. 
Game has disappeared. Weekdays and Sundays have 
to be divided between drudgery and hypocrisy. 

But the expedient of night-hunts still remains. 
Night remains the best friend of those baffled in the 
competition for the prizes of the daylight arena, and 
the young farmers of Indiana and Kansas have organ- 
ised Night-rider leagues, as their Kentucky forefathers 
organised coon-hunting clubs. In dark nights, but 
often also in cloudy full-moon nights, troops of masked 
young horsemen meet at some preappointed trysting- 
place, hold a whispered consultation and start on a 
raid — a risk-spiced expedition against some obnoxious 
member of the community. The ranch of a would-be 
informer or outspoken non-sympathiser is their favorite 
goal ; but they may content themselves with whooping 
around the cabin of a frail female or of scaring a timid 
new-comer out of his wits. Bushwacker-raids with a 
political sanction would probably be much more to 
their taste, but feeling the need of some tenable pre- 
text they have turned moralists and ride under the 
guise of social reformers. 

The real motive of their expeditions is, however, 
well demonstrated by the concurring evidence of the 
following circumstances. The prevalence of the 
"White Cap " mania, in the first place, always bears 
an exact proportion to the dearth of better pastimes, 
and to the predominance of the public sentiment 
against Sunday-sports and their substitute — alcohol- 
revels. White Cap outrages are the children of tedium. 
They are extremely rare in game-abounding Virginia, 
Tennessee, and Kentucky, in hilly Pennsylvania, in 
woody Michigan, in busy Illinois with its deep-water 
fronts, fisheries and metropolitan cities. They have 
become epidemic in Kansas and Indiana, and are get- 
ting rather frequent in the Sabbatarian counties of 
the Missouri and Ohio flatland regions. It is also 
well-known that the night-riders recruit their troops 
not from a class of moral rigorists, but from the ranks 
of lewd, mischievous, adventurous, — in short, fun- 
loving young men. Imagine young hoodlums of that 
sort assuming the role of ethical reformers. 

But the most conclusive argument against that 
pretext is the preposterous frivolity of many of the 
charges preferred against their victims. Brutality in- 



creases the spice of danger, but active brutality itself 
has a charm for certain minds, and for that reason, 
and without a vestige of moral motive, gangs of ' ' white 
caps " have half killed a crippled old Ohio shoemaker 
who had been prevented by sickness from paying, or 
wholly paying, a trifling debt ; two Indiana girls who 
had encouraged the attentions of the same youth and 
failed to heed a warning by a rival of the obnoxious 
Lothario were torn out of their beds and horribly 
maltreated by the associates of that rival. A Kansas 
preacher was dragged out in the woods at midnight 
and flayed "within an inch of his life" for having 
offered his hand and heart to a widow a few years 
older than himself. Now and then, of course, a more 
plausible pretext for a retributive raid helps to sustain 
the popularity of the night-riders, and as a rule, the 
laws of the land have proved powerless to avenge their 
brutal acts. 

Out of eighteen trials in the state of Indiana fifteen 
resulted in an acquittal " for want of proof " against 
the defendants, though those proofs were plain enough 
for the private verdict of ninety-nine of a hundred 
neighbors ; in two other cases the jury disagreed, and 
only one test- case, thanks to the energy of a fearless 
public prosecutor, led to a partial conviction of the 
prisoners. The project of organising a league of ' ' coun- 
ter-regulators " lacks the indispensable support of pub- 
lic sentiment, and a corps of government gens d'armes 
would stimulate the conspiracy of mischief-lovers as 
promptly as the establishment of the " Freedman's 
Bureau " stimulated the organisation of Kuklux clubs. 

Pulpit-censors have exhausted their eloquence in 
vain, and the only effective remedies would be the re- 
vision of the Sunday-laws and the liberal encourage- 
ment of better pastimes. 



A SMALL company recently gathered in the hall of 
the Manhattan Liberal Club to pay homage to Thomas 
Paine. It was the day after Paine's 155th birthday, 
and the deathday of Bradlaugh. The announcement 
of his death was made, and suitable resolutions passed. 
I found the meeting very interesting. During my 
ministry in the First Congregationalist Church, Cincin- 
nati, I discovered the greatness of Thomas Paine, 
and on January 29, i860, — the 123d anniversary of his 
birth, — gave a sermon concerning him. A few days 
after I received a letter from twelve of the most prom- 
inent and wealthy citizens, requesting the publication 
of the sermon, — "regarding it as a true, thorough, 
and faithful vindication of the character of one of the 
great, unappreciated, and much-abused heroes of our 
race." I can quote the compliment now without van- 
ity, knowing well that my little pamphlet was any- 

thing but " thorough." I did not half know the man. 
Since then those who in that Western city upheld 
with honor a name branded by pulpits for two genera- 
tions, — previously honored only by poor and mostly 
illiterate radicals to whose annual screams against 
Christendom I used to listen^from my corner, — have 
lived a long life. . We have seen. the fall of Slavery; 
we have seen the removal of laws which imprisoned 
woman in her home, and forbade her any share in the 
work of the world, except its drudgery. In these 
great movements we have participated, without know- 
ing that from the pen of Thomas Paine, before the 
revolution, came the first plea and scheme for negro 
emancipation in this country, and the first argument 
for the admission of woman to some participation in 
the public work of the world. I have collected a large 
quantity of unpublished matter concerning Paine, but 
Charles Bradlaugh's career has been the document 
that has best enabled me to realise the historic signifi- 
cance of that early advocate of independence, and of 
justice irrespective of sex, race, or color. 

Theology devised for Paine a retribution never ac- 
corded to any sinner outside the domain of imagina- 
tion. Shakespeare, describing the punishment in- 
flicted by meek and forbearing Christians on the Jew 
Shylock, represents them as taking away his property 
and also making him a Christian by baptism. The 
poet's satire on the Christians is recalled by the theo- 
logical doom of Paine ; they loudly affirm that he re- 
pented and recanted on his death-bed, but went to 
hell all the same. A place in heaven was never de- 
■ nied any penitent murderer on the scaffold, but Paine • 
was sentenced to both conversion and damnation. 

About fifteen years ago I was informed, on my ar- 
rival in New York, that Charles Bradlaugh was ill in 
St. Luke's Hospital. I hastened to visit him. His 
physician said that the illness had been very danger- 
ous, indeed the patient was not yet out of danger. 
Bradlaugh had expected- death. When I entered he 
took my hand eagerly, and showed a relief that at first 
I did not understand. But I presently saw that he 
had dreaded the slanders that swarmed around the 
dying and dead Paine. When I asked, "how can I 
help you ?" he said, " I have been facing death — may 
presently be facing it again, — and my doctor, all who 
have approached me, can inform you whether at any 
moment they have seen in me any sign of fear. Should 
I die, you will be able to bear witness that I am not 
afraid to die, — have never been, — nor for a moment 
faltered from the principles to which my life has been 

So far as I could learn there had been no attempt 
to invade Bradlaugh's sick-room for pious purposes, 
and no doubt the disgraceful annoyances of Paine, in 
his last moments, could not now occur in any civilised 



community. We must not, however, conclude that 
there has been a great change of heart in Christendom. 
There has been a change of head, and some weaken- 
ing of "otherworldly " dogmas, by which interest in 
the freethinker's death bed and his doom after death 
has been enfeebled. But the first result was a trans- 
fer of the penalties to this world. Bradlaugh has had 
a harder time of it than Paine. Since I saw him in 
the hospital he has seen many a time when he might 
have been glad to postpone his persecutions to his 
final hour. His gospel of secularism had prevailed 
so far as to secularise his dogmatic adversaries, who 
were no longer satisfied to trust their offender to the 
future hell he had brought into doubt, but did their 
best to anticipate it. I say "offender," instead of 
heretic or freethinker, because mere heresy has not 
for a long time been a sufficient offence to incur the 
present penalties alluded to. Paine's attack on super- 
naturalism, as then established in popular hopes and 
terrors, and on the divine authority of the Bible, un- 
settled the foundations not only of the social order, 
but even endangered every parson's salary. Society 
and the parsons have, in the course of a century, 
adapted themselves to even larger measures of denial, 
and Paine, were he alive, would find his simple The- 
ism conservative. The clergy would claim him as an 
ally against Ingersoll. But Paine's principles of ra- 
tional investigation and fidelity to every ascertained 
truth, raised a standard of revolt against arbitrary au- 
thority which could be sustained only by being carried 
beyond the field of his particular battle. It must not 
be supposed that Paine dreamed that his Theism . 
would be superseded, — though such anticipation would 
never have lowered his standard ; — but what he did 
contemplate was the steady siege and reduction of 
every fortress of ecclesiastical and dogmatic authority. 
This standard, at his death, passed from hand to 
hand ; it passed through prisons ; and at length it 
came into the hand of Charles Bradlaugh. He had 
not the genius of Paine, nor the constructive spirit of 
the author of whose testament he had become the 
executor. Which was well, for his business was to 
pull down. There is an actual incident of his early 
life that sounds like a fable of his future. When about 
twenty, he heard that some freethinkers had built a 
hall at Hackney on ground that was freehold. The 
freeholder had encouraged them to build, and even 
contributed, but took care not to give them a formal 
lease. In their ignorance they were entrapped ; the 
freeholder claimed the building and piously forbade 
their use of it. Bradlaugh, with a hundred men, car- 
ried away every brick of that building, and left the 
clever freeholder his vacant lot, and his alluring pounds 
out of pocket. In much the same way, in later years, 
Bradlaugh confronted institutions built up by the toil 

of the people, but from whose advantages they were 
withheld. His particular offence was that he explained 
to the people that the present royal family was foimded 
by an act of Parliament, and might equally be abol- 
ished by the same power. Another offence was his 
exposure of the trivial or scandalous services to mon- 
archs for which noble families were receiving pensions. 
These pensions he pulled down. He gave a great en- 
couragement to freethought in demonstrating, by sev- 
eral successful suits, that English law would protect 
even "infidels" from libel and fraud. A duly hired 
hall having been closed against him by an intimidated 
contractor, he broke in the door, delivered his lec- 
tures, and when arrested proved his legal right before 
the magistrates. There was still, however, the diffi- 
culty for "infidels" that they could not give evidence 
without professing belief in future rewards and pun- 
ishments. At this point Bradlaugh worked until the 
Evidence Amendment Acts were secured. This con- 
flict went on until atheists were also admitted to sit on 

A relic of the old press laws under which Thomas 
Paine and his friends were tried, and all that could be 
got punished, survived in a provision that every new 
journal must give sureties, in eight hundred pounds, 
that it would not publish anything blasphemous or 
seditious. In 1868 the conservative government un- 
dertook to enforce this against Bradlaugh's " National 
Reformer." We all shuddered on reading at the head 
of his next issue, "Printed in Defiance of Her Ma- 
jesty's Government." It proved to be Disraeli's bluff. 
Perhaps that Prime Minister feared that a trial might 
revive his own argument that Judas was as essential 
as Jesus to human salvation ; at any rate his govern- 
ment backed down. But Gladstone's government took 
it up, but offered not to prosecute if Bradlaugh would 
admit himself wrong and stop his paper. Bradlaugh 
was his own lawyer ; single handed he grappled with 
Sir R. Collier, Lord Coleridge, and Crompton Hutton, 
and beat them. "You have gained," wrote Mill, "a 
very honorable success in obtaining a repeal of the 
mischievous Act by your persevering resistance. " The 
government's defeat in that suit having led to a civil- 
isation of the press laws, there remained only one 
means by which freethought could be obstructed. If 
any one chose to think that any sentence in a book 
had an immoral tendency he had a good chance of 
suppressing that book, and thereby flinging some mud 
on its author or publisher, which might stick even 
after acquittal. In a previous paper I pointed out 
that, so far as hypocrisy might in that way restrict the 
entrance of the "age of reason" on moral and so- 
cial problems, it has little prospect of success since 
the defeat of the Crown in its effort to punish Brad- 
laugh for publication of the " Fruits of Philosophy. " 



I say "the Crown"; but my reader will remember 
that the Crown which prosecuted also decided against 
itself. Let me here add that the critical historian 
who shall write the history of Queen Victoria's reign, 
will have to declare that during that reign England 
became a Republic ; and that next to the Queen, 
Bradlaugh is to be credited with that result. The 
Queen's service has been the negative one of never 
interfering with Parliament or politics. How com- 
pletely she has confirmed the supremacy of Parliament 
was tested when she was called on to sign Acts ad- 
mitting into Parliament the man who had advocated 
"the impeachment of the House of Brunswick." She 
never interfered, but signed the abolition of the an- 
cient oath. And she would as unhesitatingly have 
signed it had it been brought her before the House of 
Commons had disgraced itself. For some time Brad- 
laugh represented the constitution of England against 
a parliamentary mob. When the house refused to let 
its officers administer to him the oath, he administered 
it to himself. The legislative mobocrats tore his coat, 
imprisoned him in the Clock Tower, and boasted that 
they were stronger than he. But they were mistaken. 
The man who was put up to prosecute him for having 
voted without properly taking the oath did not know 
all the weapons in the ancient law-armory to which he 
appealed. There was an ancient law against " main- 
tenance" — i. e. supplying money or other aid to any 
one to prosecute a third party. The distinguished 
member of the House of Commons who supplied the 
funds found the prosecution recoiling on him, and was 
so impoverished by damages added to his subsidies 
that the hat had to be passed around for him. Brad- 
laugh pleaded before the House of Lords, where he 
had no friendly ear, but it decided in his favor. By 
a series of brilliant legal victories, won from personally 
reluctant courts, Bradlaugh did much to convince the 
English masses that there was such a thing as a Con- 
stitution in Great Britain, and that the law could be 
depended on. In all this he especially fulfilled the 
last testament of Paine. His great forerunner's Qua- 
ker horror of war was increased by the revolutionary 
bloodshed in America and France ; he had impressively 
exhorted his radical adherents in England to suffer 
much in order to make their revolution peaceful ; he 
knew that his own principles were English principles, 
whatever ancient dross might mingle with them. 
Bradlaugh was the one leading EngHsh radical whose 
legal knowledge enabled him to see that the constitu- 
tion was fundamentally on the side of freedom and 
justice. Had it not been for that knowledge, and his 
heroic perseverance, England might have suffered a 
bloody revolution. His every encounter burnt away 
the ancient dross and brought out the true elements 
of the constitution. But each effort burnt away some- 

thing of his own life. Every victory took a year from 
his span. He was an eloquent speaker ; and he might 
have written good books had not duty decided that 
his thoughts must be written in deeds. 

So Charles Bradlaugh fulfilled Thomas Paine's 
trust. He passed the "Rights of Man" and the "Age 
of Reason " into Acts of Parliament. His death-bed 
was surrounded by fetters broken by his right arm. 
He was born, in 1833, into an England largely shackled 
in heart, brain, tongue, pen ; he leaves an England as 
free as any country in the world. 


And now it is the Lord Mayor o£ London who has been de- 
tected in the awful crime of plagiarism. His Lordship delivered 
an address before the Polytechnic Institute, and it appears that 
most of his remarks were borrowed from a sermon preached by 
the Rev. Mr. Spurgeon in 1864. The P.ill .Vull Ga-.ctle published 
the two productions in deadly parrallels, and the Lord Mayor, 
being called on for an explanation, said that to the best of his 
knowledge he had never seen the sermon referred to, and could 
not account for the likeness between it and his own address. Here 
is a puz2le in psychology which ought to be explained. Can there 
be a vagrant mental soul, capable of inspiring two different men 
to express the same thoughts in the same language, without any 
collusion between them, and without either of them having heard 
or seen the speech and sentiment of the other ? Or is the phenom- 
enon the mischievous trick of a fairy, showing to her companions 
" what fools these mortals be " ? Or is it a bit of metaphysical 
magic ? Perhaps it is that spiritual freak which we call " uncon- 
scious cerebration," a vagary of hypnotism whereby the thoughts 
and words of others are photographed upon our own brains with- 
out our knowledge or consent. A London paper explains that the 
coincidence was due to the fact that Mr. Spurgeon and the Lord 
Mayor had both cribbed from the same orator, and this may be 
the correct solution of the mystery. 

Plagiarism is one of the useful arts. How much vagabond 
and miscellaneous genius would be wasted were there not men of 
talent with industry and cunning enough to search for it, appro- 
priate it, and set it in a literary frame. How many a gem of purest 
ray serene, flung carelessly from the brain of some political ranter, 
some social agitator, or some newspaper obscurity lies neglected 
and rejected until suddenly it flashes on us from the senate, or 
from some famous pulpit, or perhaps gleams at us from the pages 
of some great novel, history, or poem, apparently the original 
creation of the senator, the preacher, or the poet, as the case may 
be. This is good serviceable plagiarism, to which the world is 
much indebted, although when found out it goes by the name of 
larceny. How much of the foundling genius of his time has been 
preserved to us by the hospitable plagiarism of Shakespeare, poetic 
and philosophic jewels which had he not adopted them would 
have been lost for ever ! The magnanimous description of Car- 
dinal Wolsey, given by Griffith in his dialogue with Queen Cath- 
erine, is taken almost literally from old Hollingshead's history, a 
book long since forgotten, and Shakespeare did well in taking it. 
When he committed literary theft it was always grand larceny; he 
never condescended to petit larceny; and at any rate, we can par- 
don Shakespeare for borrowing the thoughts of others when we re- 
member how much and how often others have borrowed from him. 
* * 

There is not plagiarism enough ; it would be well if we had 
more of it, especially in the pulpit. A few years ago an eminent 



minister of Chicago preached a sermon which was much admired, 
There was an unpleasant person present (there always is) who 
thought that he had read it in a religious journal called the Foun- 
tain, so he rummaged the files of that paper and found out that some 
passages in the sermon had been preached by a minister in London 
several months before. Then the newspapers printed the two ser- 
mons in parallel columns and exposed what they called the ' ' of- 
fense " of the Chicago minister. He put in the plea of " uncon- 
scious cerebration," instead of stoutly avowing his act and justify- 
ing it. The truth is that our preachers do not plagiarise enough. 
If they did they would have larger congregations. People would 
go to church much oftener than they do if they thought the minister 
would occasionally plagiarise a sermon from some of the great 
preachers of the world. A minister who is tired, or nervous, or 
careworn, ought to be allowed to plagiarise a sermon, and if his 
selection be a good one he should have praise instead of blame for 
doing so. If a minister will honestly inform his parishioners that 
hereafter he will write his own sermons except when he feels tired, 
or sick, or mentally disturbed, and then will plagiarise a good one 
from somebody else, they will if they have any sense at all, not 
only be satisfied with the arrangement but give him an increase of 

Another comical bit of plagiarism arises from the morbid 
vanity that prompts us to affix our littleness to the greatness of 
some dead or living hero of the time. When a famous general 
dies there steps into the funeral that mendacious old veteran who 
tells that once upon the march when he was foot-sore and tired 
the general rode up surrounded by a brilliant staff, and dismount- 
ing from his horse helped the fainting soldier into the saddle, the 
general doing the rest of the march on foot while the weary strag- 
gler triumphantly rode six miles past his envious comrades, many 
of them foot-sore and weary as himself. The story does not say 
that the general carried the soldier's knapsack and gun, but of 
course this is understood, for without that service the act of kind- 
ness would be incomplete. At the funeral of General Sherman, 
this veracious veteran appeared, hailing from the town of Me- 
chanicsburg, Ohio, and related the venerable fable just as it has 
been told of every general from Joshua to Sherman. When we 
consider that in the rear of a marching army there are always 
hundreds of sick and foot-sore men straggling along, the truth of 
the story becomes visible, and the kindness of the general in pick- 
ing them up is magnified in proportion to the numbers thus re- 
lieved. Similar in vanity is the ancient fiction which explains the 
way to work through college. How comes it that whenever some 
unknown and unexpected person has the good luck to be elected 
to the United States senate, his biographers immediately inform 
us through the newspapers that he worked his way through col- 
lege by " sawing wood." By what weird necromancy is this done ? 
Or is this merely a college legend plagiarised from generation to 
generation ? If not, what college is it that confers degrees upon 
young men for skill in sawing wood ? 

-K * 

A great civic triumph has been won in Chicago ; the Italians 
must not work on the Exposition buildings to be erected in honor 
of their countryman, Columbus. To threats of mischief hurled 
by "organised labor" is due this magnanimous achievement. It 
is now conceded that under some pretext or other the Italians are 
to be excluded from the work, and a sort of treaty is already pend- 
ing, if it has not been ratified, between the Exposition authorities 
and " organised labor." The first article of this treaty is, "The 
employment of union labor as far as possible"; and the third is, 
" Preference to be given to local residents and American citizens." 
It is under this that the Italians are to be proscribed. It is pre- 
tended that they are especially aliens, and one of the great papers 
of Chicago actually spoke of the difficulty between them and the 

"whites." This persecution of Italians is the most dangerous and 
selfish form of class tyranny that has yet appeared among our 
social complications since the abolition of slavery. Lest the Ital- 
ians, or whoever may happen to be the proscribed element for the 
time, should escape the "American citizen" penalty by "taking 
out their papers," they are to be punished under the " local resi- 
dent " clause of the treaty ; and this is vague and general enough 
to include any sect or nationality that "organised labor" may 
choose to sentence to idleness and starvation. When this clause 
comes to be defined it will appear that "local residents" are those 
persons who have lived in the city for one, two, three, or ten 
years, or such time as may be dictated by this know-nothingism 
of labor. Every man in Chicago is a resident of the city whether 
he has been here ten days or ten years, and he has equal social 
rights with every other man, especially the right to labor for his 
bread. All men have the right to work for a living, and it is the 
right of every man that every other man shall work. All regula- 
tions, laws, decrees, and sentences that limit or abridge that right 
are cruel, despotic and unwise. They multiply the evils they are 
intended to diminish because they lessen production, and conse- 
quently the demand for labor, They reduce the working men to 
the condition of social cannibals devouring one another, like the 
shipwrecked sailors on the raft, who when one man is eaten 
cast lots for another. So, in this case, when the Italians are de- 
voured, it will be necessary to eat the Poles, and then the Hun- 
garians, and then the Irish, and so on until the last man of the 
crew, having eaten all the others, quietly starves to death. 

M. M. Trumbull. 



To the Editor of The Open Court: 

I REGRET that illness at home has delayed the expression of 
my sincere thanks to Mr. Ellis for pointing out, the unconscious 
misrepresentation I had made, in my article on the "Hidden 
Self," of Mr. Lewes's views. In this remote colony, to which I 
came three years ago, it was impossible for me to refer to Mr. 
Lewes's works ; they had been parted with, together with the 
greater portion of my husband's library, as too heavy for transport. 
I thought my recollection of the passage referred to was so vivid 
that I need fear no mistake in relying on my memory. But in 
replacing the word " sensibility "by " consciousness " I see to my 
horror and vexation that I have attributed to Mr. Lewes the very 
word he strenuously objected to having used in that particular 
sense. The discrepancy lies, I trust, more in the particular word 
employed, than in the idea expressed. If we replace both " sensi- 
bility " and "consciousness" by the plain Anglo-Saxon word 
" feeling," it will be obvious that I was endeavoring to combat the 
same fallacy that Mr. Lewes did, viz. the prevalent idea that there 
can be no " feeling " where the connection with the highest cere- 
bral centres have been destroyed. Mr. Lewes, says Mr. Ellis, 
was endeavoring to controvert the particular fallacy "that the 
Brain and the Brain only is the seat of Sensibility," and ' that con- 
' sequently the action of the rest of the Cerebro-Spinal Axis was 
'purely Reflex, Physical, and Mechanical.' And the following 
passage given by Mr. Ellis would certainly have been quoted by 
me if I had had Mr. Lewes's works at hand, as expressing exactly 
what I should myself wish to say: 

" It is true," he says, " that the man himself when interrogated 
' ' declares that he feels nothing ; the cerebral segment has attached 
" to it, organs of speech, and expressive features by which its sen- 
" sations can be communicated to others ; whereas the spinal seg- 
" ment has no such means of communicating its sensations ; but 
" those which it has it employs." . . . . " The question we have to 



' ' decide therefore is, not whether a patient with an injured spine 
"can feel impressions on, or convey voluntary impulses to limbs 
' ' below the seat of injury — for as respects the nervous mechanism 
" these limbs are separated from him no less than if actual ampu- 
" tation had taken place — the question is, whether these separated 
"limbs have any sensibility? And the answer seems to me un- 
" equivocally affirmative. I assert therefore that if there is ample 
"evidence to show that the spinal centres have sensibility when 
"separated from the cerebral centres, such evidence can in no 
" sense be weakened by the fact that a man with an injured spine 
"is unconscious of impressions made below the seat of injury ; 
" such a fact follows necessarily from the establishment of two 

What Mr. Lewes, if I understand rightly, would call "con- 
sciousness" I should call "self-consciousness," meaning in both 
cases the function of the highest cerebral centres ; these only can 
be called the seat of " the activity which is salient and discrimina- 
tive." I used the word " consciousness " instead of " sensibility," 
because I cannot conceive of sensibility without consciousness. 
The strongest stimuli applied to sensory nerves are non-existent 
for the organism, that is no feeling of any kind is excited unless a 
response is elicited from some portion of the cerebro-spinal axis. 
If the " mind " is otherwise occupied, loud conversation will strike 
unheeded upon the ear, varied sights will pass unseen before the 
eye ; rough contact will be unnoted. Sensibility I should define 
as the function of the peripheral sensory nerves, which convey the 
impressions made by the outer world to the mysterious energy we 
know as consciousness ; an energy which appears to me to exist in 
its simplest form in unicellular organisms, and reaches its highest 
expression in the human brain. I cannot see that any break oc- 
curs throughout the animal kingdom ; consciousness is found from 
the protozoon up to the human infant, and as the brain of the in- 
fant matures gradually expands in the highest cerebral centres 
into self-consciousness. 

I do not like that it should be said or thought of me, that I 
"endeavor to increase the number of consciousnesses." If any 
endeavor of mine could i/fcrease the number of consciousnesses, 
and restore the simple supreme Ego, — the one entity of which we 
used to feel certain, — to its old dominion, I would work willingly 
at the task. My only endeavor has been to put certain facts which 
appear indisputably proved by men of science, before the readeis 
of The Open Court whilst I stated the conclusions to which those 
facts seem to point. I object strongly to what Dr. Cams has 
called an " onion structure of the soul," but the question in all 
physical science is not what one would like to be true, but what 
is, in point of fact, the Truth. Mrs. Alice Bodington. 

Matsqui, British Columbia. 

[I do not remember ever having spoken of the "onion struc- 
ture of the soul " ; still I dissent from Mrs. Bodington's view of 
"the simple and supreme ego." P. c] 


My Uncle Benjamin. A Humorous, Satirical, and Philosoph- 
ical Novel. By Claude Tillier. Translated from the French 
by Benj. R. Tucker. With a Sketch of the Author's Life and 
Works by Ludwig Pfau. Boston : Benj. R. Tucker. 
This book has been buried in oblivion for almost thirty years, 
until it was brought to light again by a German titiialeur. Lud- 
wig Pfau tells us the story of his discovery as follows : 

"At the beginning of the fifties, while I was sauntering through 
Paris one day and standing before one of those itinerant news 
stalls that exhibit their wares on the ramparts of the quais and 
under the archways of the houses, my eyes caught sight of a stitched 
volume, of damaged appearance. No cover, no title-page, no pref- 
ace, neither? author 'nor printer, — nothing but a dirty title pasted 

on with the three words : Mon Oncle Benjamin. I do not know 
what attraction these three words had for me, but they seemed to 
look at me in a friendly way, as if to say : " Only turn the leaves ' 
you will not regret it." I was not long to be entreated, and, in- 
deed, scarcely had I hurried through a few pages when both style 
and contents began to fascinate me in such a degree that I bought 
the book for a few sous and put it in my pocket. Then I went to 
Luxembourg garden, took a seat beneath a chestnut tree, and did 
not rise again until I had read the book to the end. 

The author of the book, Claude Tillier, had been forgotten, 
or perhaps never attained among his countrymen the prominence 
he deserved, simply because he had " lived in the province, died 
in the province and was therefore being ignored by Paris." 

Ludwig Pfau visited his sunken grave and determined to re- 
vive the memory of Claude Tillier. He addressed his "pensive 
shade " in the lonely churchyard : 

" Here you rest now, quietly and forsaken, under your modest 
sod, brave champion !' I, too, am an exiled disciple of liberty, 
traveling along your paths and come for devotion to your grave. 
I, the refugee, will erect a monument to you in my home. I will 
translate your ' Benjamin,' into a language that appeals to forty 
millions of hearts. Look you, our enemies consider us as poor in 
wealth and as weak in power ; but we are rich in spirit and strong 
of will, and we are their masters by the might of wisdom. An 
eternal law holds sway and its mighty spirit is leading the world 
gently, but irresistibly, towards our goal : the liberation of the 
human race, the reign of justice. 

Concerning Tillier as an author Pfau says : Rarely do we find 
a combination of so much lyrical charm and so much polemical 
power and logical rigor as in the writings of Tillier. He was one 
of those beautiful natures of native nobility, who rise out of the 
depth of society, and who, in spite of temptation and misery, pass 
unsullied through the filth of life. Wholly of the third estate and 
of the people, he loved liberty passionately and battled for her 
heroically. Regardless of personal matters, he lived for his idea 
and found his reward in himself. Unselfishness was his virtue 
and human dignity his religion. 

Mr. Benj. R. Tucker has translated Tillier's Oncle Beiija- 
ot/« into English — which, he says, is " a novel unlike any other 
by an author unlike any other. 

After these testimonies we need not add that the book pos- 
sesses a greater value than the literary merits of humor. The 
satire is only the garb which conceals the bravery of progress and 
the ideals of aspiring humanity. 

George Washington's Rules of Civility. Traced to their 

Sources and Restored. By Moncwe D. Comcay. New York : 

United States Book Company. 

Mr. M. D. Conway explains the history of this his latest book 
in the preface as follows : 

"Among the manuscript books of George Washington, pre- 
served in the State Archives at Washington City, the earliest bears 
the date, written in it by himself, 1745. Washington was born Feb- 
ruary II, 1731 O. S., so that while writing in this book he was 
either near the close of his fourteenth, or in his fifteenth year. It 
is entitled 'Forms of Writing,' has thirty folio pages, and the 
contents, all in his boyish handwriting, are sufficiently curious. 
Amid copied forms of exchange, bonds, receipts, sales, and similar 
exercises, occasionally, in ornate penmanship, there are poetic 
selections, among them lines of a religious tone on ' True Happi- 
ness.' But the great interest of the book centres in the pages 
headed : ' Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and 
Conversation.' The book had been gnawed at the bottom by 
Mount Vernon mice, before it reached the State Archives, and 
nine of the no Rules have thus suffered, the sense of several be- 
ing lost. 



"The Rules possess so much historic interest that it seems 
surprising that none of Washington's biographers or editors should 
have given them to the world. . . . But in i88S the Rules were 
subjected to careful and literal treatment by Dr. J. M. Toner, of 
Washington City, in the course of his magnanimous task of pre- 
serving, in the Library of Congress, by exact copies, the early 
and perishing note-books and journals of Washington. This 
able literary antiquarian has printed his transcript of the Rules 
(W. H. Morrison ; Washington, D. C. 1888), and the pam- 
phlet, though little known to the general public, is much valued 
by students of American history. With the exception of one 
word, to which he called my attention. Dr. Toner has given as 
exact a reproduction of the Rules, in their present damaged con- 
dition, as can be made in print. The illegible parts are precisely 
indicated, without any conjectural insertions, and young Wash- 
ington's spelling and punctuation subjected to no literary tamper- 

" Concerning the source of these remarkable Rules there have 
been several guesses. ..." 

Mr. Conway suspected a French origin of Washington's 
"Rules of Civility," because his first teacher in Fredericksburg, 
Va. , had been the Rev. James Marye, a native of that country ; 
and he at last succeeded, with the assistance of Dr. Garnett, libra- 
rian of the British Museum, in discovering the source of the man- 

Mr. Conway tells us the curious story of how these rules mi- 
grated from an old Jesuit College in France, through the hands of 
a Huguenot to Virginia. He adds : 

" Here then are rules of conduct, taught, if my theory be cor- 
rect, by a French protestant pilgrim, unknown to fame, in the 
New World. They were taught to a small school of girls and 
boys, in a town of hardly a hundred inhabitants. They are max- 
ims partly ethical, but mainly relate to manners and civility ; they 
are wise, gentle, and true. A character built on them would be 
virtuous, and probably great." 

same incident happens again, but in addition to the proclivities of 
the father, Oswald has inherited the wages of his sin — a most ter- 
rible disease which terminates in a softening of the brain. 

Nora ; or, A Doll's House. And Ghosts. By Hciuik Ibsen. 
Translated from the Norwegian by Henrietta Frances Lord. 
Chicago : Lily Publishing House. 

The translation of these two dramas of the great Norwegian 
poet by Miss Henrietta Frances Lord is sufficiently clear to bring 
home to us the awe and power of the original — provided we have 
sufficient patience, and are not disturbed by the oddities of certain 
awkward expressions and literal renderings. 

Ibsen's poems cannot be read for amusement, they must be 
studied, and the more carefully they are read, the more food for 
thought will they give. They present to us the sickness of our 
time partly to suggest a cure, partly to give way to a hopeless 
pessimism. " Nora, or A Doll's House " treats of the woman ques- 
tion. Nora has lived in a doll's house, her life has been play 
rather than serious work. Being confronted with duties she makes 
a mistake which legally, however, would have been a crime. 
With the purest of motives she forged her husband's signature, 
who is president of a bank. Shame and ruin threaten ; her hus- 
band is full of indignation. But all turns out well ; the danger of 
public exposure passes by ; he calms down and is satisfied. But 
Nora is not. Having been so long a mere plaything, the doll of 
her husband, having faced the terrible possibility of criminal pro- 
secution and conviction, she decides to learn the duties of life, to 
become independent in conscience and judgment. Her husband 
hopes in vain that she will stay, but she leaves his house. 

Nora suggests a cure, but the "Ghosts" ends in desolation. 
It is the most awe-inspiring tragedy of modern times. The title 
is suggested by an incident. The son, Oswald Alving, has in- 
herited the proclivities of his father ; the father is dead, yet the 

The Co-operative Commonwealth. An Exposition of Socialism. 

By Laurence Gronlund, M. A. Boston : Lee & Shepard. 

This book contains not so much discussions on social economy, 
as the Nationalists' creed concerning social economy. The pres- 
ent system is described as the Profit system and capital is defined 
as "mainly accumulated Heecings." Mr. Gronlund is possessed 
of a boundless optimism as to the results of society's adopting na- 
tionalism. All the evils which are felt now will pass away, and 
the happy issue of the coming revolution will be a millennium upon 








THE SQUARING OF THE CIRCLE. The History of the Problem from the 
Most Ancient Times to the Present Day. HERMANN SCHUBERT. 

THE CRITERION OF TRUTH. A Dissertation on the Method of Verifica- 
tion. EDITOR. 

chology of the Star-Fish. CARUS STERNE. 









$9.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 


THE AMERICAN CAMORRA. Dr. Felix L. Oswald. 2723 

MoNcuRE D. Conway 2725 

CURRENT TOPICS. Plagiarism. The Right to Work. 

Gen. M. M. Trumbull 2727 


Sensibility and Consciousness. Mrs. Alice Bodington 2728 

The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion with Science. 

No. 185. (Vol. v.— 3 ) 

CHICAGO, MARCH 12, 1891. 

( Two Dollars per Yea 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



To my mind the historical proof of the existence 
of God, which is suppHed us by the history of the re- 
Hgions of the world, has never been refuted ; and can- 
not be refuted. It forms the foundation of all other 
proofs, call them cosmological, ontological, or teleo- 
logical ; or, rather, it absorbs them all, and makes 
them all superfluous. 

There are those who declare that they require no 
proof at all for the existence of a Supreme Being, or, 
if they did, that they would find it in revelation. Sup- 
pose they wanted no proof themselves, would they 
really not care at all to know how the human race, 
and how they themselves, came in possession of what, 
I suppose, they value as their most precious inheri- 
tance. Do they really think that in this case an ex- 
amination of the ancient title-deeds might safely be 
dispensed with, while with regard to much less pre- 
cious holdings it is considered a plain duty to guard 
these documents with the greatest care. 

An appeal to revelation is of no avail in deciding 
questions of this kind. The history of religions teaches 
us that the same appeal to a special revelation is made, 
not only by Christianity, but by the defenders of Brah- 
nianism, of Zoroastrianism, and of Mohammedanism, 
and where is the tribunal to adjudicate on the conflict- 
ing appeals of these and other claimants ? The be- 
liever in the Vedas is as thoroughly convinced of the 
superhuman origin of his ancient hymns as the Zoro- 
astrian of that of the Gathas and the Mohammedan of 
that of the Surahs ; and the subtle arguments by which 
each, but more particularly the Brahman, supports 
his claims, would put some of our ablest casuists to 
shame. The followers of every one of these religions 
declare their belief in the revealed character of their 
own religion, never in that of any other religion. Many 
persons believe, and believe honestly, in visions they 
have had themselves, never in the visions claimed by 
other people. We may appeal to revelation in the 
court of our own conscience, but, before the court of 
universal appeal, we require different proofs for the 
faith that is in us. 

Our belief in God as the author of all that exists, 

* From the report of the fourth Gifford Lecture in the Christian IVorld, 
sent by Prof. Max Mliller. 

whether we call Him father, or creator, or supporter 
of the world, has its deepest, its only living roots in 
that ancient, universal stratum of thought which pos- 
tulated an agent in the sky, the sun, the fire, and the 
storm-wind ; which was not satisfied with the mere 
play of appearances in nature, but yearned to know 
what it was that appeared ; which felt the limits of the 
finite in all its sensuous perceptions, and in feeling the 
limits, felt at the same time the presence of something 
that was beyond those limits. This dissatisfaction 
with the finite, this struggle after the non-finite, this 
search for an agent for every act, of a mover for every 
movement, whatever shape it took, whatever name it 
claimed, forms the primitive and indestructible foun- 
dation of man's faith in God. If it is taken away, 
people may indeed have dogma, and may have creeds, 
but they cannot have their own ineradicable convic- 
tion that there is and that there must be a God. 

Dogma can supply no argument against Atheism. 
Dogma is what my excellent colleague at Edinburgh, 
Mr. Hutchison Stirling, has very truly called mere 
Vorstellung which requires for its philosophical foun- 
dation the Begriff. But that Begrijf has a history, 
and it is this history of the Begriff which to my mind 
is the true, because unanswerable answer to all Athe- 
ism. I should go so far as to say that the history of 
religion is the best proof of religion, just as the growth 
of the oak-tree is the best proof of the oak-tree. There 
may be excrescences, there may be dead leaves, there 
may be broken branches, but the oak-tree is there, 
once for all, whether in the sacred groves of Germany, 
or at Dodona, or in the Himalayan forests. It is 
there, not by our own will, but by itself, or by a 
Higher Will. There may be corruptions, there may 
be antiquated formulas, there may be sacred writings 
flung to the wind, but religion is there, once for all, 
in all its various representations. You can as little 
sweep away the oak-tree with all its millions of seeds 
from the face of the earth, as you can eradicate re- 
ligion from the human heart. 

The history of religion teaches us that the one 
everlasting conviction on which the whole of Natural 
Religion has been built from the beginning of the 
world is trtie. That is the conviction that there is an 
Infinite behind the finite, that there is an agent behind 
all acts, there is a God in nature. Convince the hu- 



man understanding that there can be acts without 
agents, that there can be a limit without something 
beyond, that there can be a finite without a non-finite, 
and you have proved that there is no God. But let 
it be shown that the universality of that belief rests on 
that without which sense would not be sense, reason 
would not be reason, man would not be man, and we 
may say that for man as he is, for reason as it is, nay 
even for the perceptions of the senses as they are, be- 
lief in something infinite, in an agent, in a god, is irre- 
sistible. All names that human language has invented 
may be imperfect, may be deceptive, and may have 
to be replaced by newer and ever truer names. But 
the name ' I am that I am ' will remain for those who 
think Semitic thought, while to those who speak Aryan 
languages it will be difficult to invent a better name 
than that of the Vedanta, Sat-Kit aiianda. He who is, 
who knows, and who is blessed. 


Prof. Max Mueller's view of religion is based on 
the conception of the infinite. His idea of God is the 
infinite behind the finite. He says : 

"Convince the human understanding that there can be acts 
without agents, that there can be a limit without something be- 
yond, that there can be a finite without a non-finite, and you have 
proved that there is no God." 

Is this not going rather too far ? Does the agent 
supposed to be behind the processes of nature con- 
stitute nature's divinity? Prof. Max Muller's view 
of God is scientific as well as radical, but it makes of 
religion a metaphysical speculation ; it identifies it 
with the conception of an hypothetic something be- 
hind nature of which we really know nothing. It ap- 
pears very desirable to free religion from this metaphys- 
ical element and build it upon the positive facts of our 
experience which will always remain its safest founda- 

Positivism knows of no agent behind the natural 
phenomena ; it dispenses also with the agent behind 
the psychical processes of soul-life. Positivism is an 
economy of thought. Instead of viewing acts as mo- 
tions produced by the pressure of an agent behind 
them, we think the act and agent together as one. The 
agent is /;/, not beJiiiid the act. The act is the agent 

Positivism is commonly represented as atheism just 
as much as the view of the orthodox Oxford Professor 
would have been decried as atheism some ten or 
twenty years ago. And I grant that Positivism is not 
Theism, if Theism means the belief in a personal God 
who being shaped into the image of man, is conceived 
as an individual being, as a great world-ego swayed 
by considerations and even by passions and emotions, 
thinking now of this now of that thought, and regulat- 

ing the affairs of the universe as it pleases him like a 
powerful monarch. 

There is nothing more or less divine in the infinite 
than in any other mathematical, logical, or scientific' 
idea. The infinite has one advantage only — if it be 
an advantage — over other ideas ; its nature is less 
understood. But if there were anything divine in 
the conception of the infinite, why do we not use such 
formulas a ^ or tangent go degrees, or simply the sign 
CO as holy emblems in our churches ? 

Prof. Max Miiller must have felt this insufficiency 
of the idea of infinitude as the basis of religion. At 
least he has on another occasion modified his defini- 
tion. In a former article of his,* Prof. Max Miiller 
says : 

" It may be said in fact it has been said, that the definition 
of religion which I laid down is too narrow and too arbitrary. . . . 
I thought it right to modify ray first definition of religion as ' the 
perception of the Infinite,' by narrowing that perception to ' such 
manifestations as are able to influence the moral character of man.' 
I do not deny that in the beginning the perception of the Infinite 
had often very little to do with moral ideas, and I am quite aware 
that many religions enjoin what is either not moral or even im- 
moral. But though there are perceptions of the Infinite uncon- 
nected as yet with moral ideas, I doubt whether they should be 
called religious till they assume a moral influence. On this point 
there may be difference of opinion, but every one may claim the 
right of his own opinion." 

The infinite, it appears to me, is not at all a spe- 
cially religious idea, and it will be very difficult to 
prove how the idea of the infinite can ever assume a 
moral influence, except in a very limited sphere. The 
powers of nature in their overwhelming influence upon 
the fate of man in a beneficent and evil way, the light 
of the sun, the flashes of the thunderstorm, the joy of 
great triumphs, the enthusiasm after extraordinary 
successes, our trials and sorrow at the bedside of 
our beloved ones, the agonies and anxieties of life, in 
one word definite and actual realities have done 
much more than the idea of the infinite in the produc- 
tion of religion. I am aware that Prof. Max Miiller 
says : " These finite realities suggest an infinite agent 
beyond them. " But this is no description of religion ; it 
is an interpretation of religious ideas, representing 
them in a special phase of development. 

The infinite may have produced a religious awe in 
a lonely scholar when he pondered over the problems 
of its nature and found himself unable to solve them. 
And it may have stirred a still deeper religious emo- 
tion in the mathematical mind who succeeded in solv- 
ing some of its problems. But the same religious in- 
fluence must be attributed to any other scientific idea. 
Was not Kepler overwhelmed with the grandeur of 
the cosmos when he solved the riddle of the mo- 
tions of the heavenly bodies? Was not his emotion 

* Fire- Worship and Mytlwlogy in t 
Court, pa^e 2322, No. 146, Vol. IV.— 16). 

Relation to Religi 



truly religious, and is there anj'thing infinite in his 

It will be noticeable that the infinite as a properl)' 
religious idea enjoys a very limited field. The two 
greatest religious documents are to my mind the Deca- 
logue representing the Old Testament and the Lord's 
Prayer representing the New Testament ; in neither 
can any idea of the infinite be found. It is true that 
the Lord's prayer ends with the clause "for thine is 
the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. 
Amen." "Forever" I grant, means infinite time. But 
it is well known that these words are not genuine with 
Christ ; they have been added by the Christians of the 
first or second century ; and if they were genuine, how 
incidental is the idea of the infinite, how secondary if 
compared with the momentous propositions of the 
prayer itself ! It appears that religion would not suffer 
if the idea of the infinite were entirely dropped from 
its definition and Prof. Max. Miiller's additional clause 
(i. e. " that which will influence the moral character of 
man") were made its main essence. 

The definition of God as the infinite conveys no clear 
idea. The popular view of the infinite is very indefi- 
nite, and its scientific conception is a thought-symbol 
for a process never to be finished. The scientific 
view of the infinite does not represent a complete and 
real thing, but an incomplete and never to be com- 
pleted function. Suppose that in measuring the world 
we arrived at the last star of the farthest milky way 
and took our stand between the definite reality behind, 
and empty space before us, is there no divinity in the 
finite existences we have measured, and is God living 
in the nothingness of the infinite space that lies be- 
yond us unmeasured and immeasurable? 

Let us define God as those realities of our expe- 
rience to which we have to comform ; as those mani- 
festations of nature which we cannot fashion ; as those 
laws of cosmic existence which we have to obey; and 
atheism will never again rise to overthrow the proofs 
of an existence of God. God is the authority of moral 
conduct, and religion is the basis of morality. All ideas 
which influence the moral character of man are re- 
ligious while dogmas are either religiously indifferent, 
as if they represent ideas having no bearing upon 
moral conduct, or even deeply irreligious, if they are 
productive of immoral habits. And one of the most 
immoral church doctrines, not as yet entirely aban- 
doned by orthodox people, is that man should believe 
blindly. It is a sacred religious duty to investigate 
the truth most scrupulously. Religion is not belief in 
the supernatural as the theologian of the old school 
says, nor is it the search for the infinite, as Prof. Max 
Miiller says. Religion is much simpler. It is our search 
for truth with the aspiration to regulate our conduct 
in accord with truth. p. c. 



As an independent Agnostic, and a regular reader 
of The Open Court I hope I may be permitted to ex- 
press the contemplative pleasure given me by the edi- 
torial article with the above title in the issue for Jan- 
uary 29th. 

What is there called the "Agnosticism of Science " 
is, I believe, the attitude of a strong and growing sec- 
tion of our English Agnostics. Among this section 
the doctrine of the Unknowable is very much equiv- 
alent to the doctrine of the Unknown. And the re- 
gion of the Unknown has special stress laid upon it, 
not at all for the purpose of restricting inquiry — as is 
sometimes represented — but for the purpose of point- 
ing out the actual ignorance of those who assume to 
have what they are pleased to call supernatural knowl- 

Moreover, those who hold by this form of agnos- 
ticism consider that, if there be any advantage in the 
term "Unknowable," as against the term " Unknown," 
it lies in the greater emphasis supposed to be laid, by 
the Spencerian term, on the creation of a common 
ground, upon which philosophical naturalists may 
meet those philosophical supernaturalists who are will- 
ing to allow Science an absolutely free pass in every 
field of investigation — not excepting that of Theology 

It certainly does seem to the writer that, — whatever 
be the precise meaning which our great master, Her- 
bert Spencer, attaches to the word, — the Unknowable 
must be held to have reference, not to all eternity, but 
merely to the present time. Even Goethe, whose 
scientific philosophy was so often tinged with a poetic 
mysticism, could say: "Man must always in some 
"sense cling to the belief that the unknowable is 
" knowable, otherwise speculations would cease. " This 
is of course tantamount to admitting that "unknow- 
able " is in reality only a question-begging epithet, 
if applied to any criterion of knowledge other than 
that which we at present possess ; and an epithet that 
may easily be made an excuse for indolent acquiescence 
in know-nothingness. 

It is surely time that some more close and com- 
prehensive agreement than now maintains should be 
arranged, between such thinkers of the Positive-Mo- 
nist, and the Agnostic School, as hold in common the 
"Agnosticism of Science" portrayed in the recent 
article in question. With all due deference to the able 
journalistic leaders of either side, I cannot but think 
that they are sometimes prone to magnify into essen- 
tial differences what are only individualist distinctions, 
perfectly compatible with shoulder-to-shoulder philo- 
sophic fight against all supernaturalistic opponents. 





They had a most animated and exciting debate at 
the banquet of the Sunset Club on the 19th of last 
month, for the subject was " Money and its functions," 
a theme fruitful of political superstitions, and illumi- 
nated by a spiritual faith in the omnipotence of gov- 
ernment to make the numbers three and five exactly 
equal in quantity and value to each other, an innocent 
belief in the miraculous power of Congress to engraft 
new laws upon the ancient scheme of Nature, so that 
we may gather grapes of thorns and figs of thistles, 
or pluck dollars from the tree of legislation, a feat 
which amounts to the same thing. 

The debate was opened by Mr. Clinton Furbish in 
a glowing speech, witty, sarcastic, and sharp ; a speech 
abounding in assertions proving the "fiat" preroga- 
tive of government, its divine authority to create 
money, and its ability to transmute base matter into 
diamonds by a touch of its magic wand, as easily as 
the fairy changed mice into horses in order that the 
beautiful Cinderella might ride in grandeur to the 
prince's ball. He said that "fiat money saved the 
nation," that the soldiers were paid for saving it in 
"the crisp greenback, the fiat money of the govern- 
ment. And if it is not money to-day, call the roll and 
pay off Sherman's army, for if they were not paid in 
greenbacks they have not been paid yet. " This was 
"crisp" as the greenback itself, but it called up a 
most unlucky reminiscence, the bad character of the 
greenback, and the mischievous mistake that brought 
it into being. The vice of it was its limited purchas- 
ing power, a corruption incurable by human fiat, and 
the soldiers were cheated by it; not the soldiers 
only, but all people dependent upon wages expressed 
in "dollars." The same objection applies to all pa- 
per money not redeemable on demand in the dearest 
metallic; money current in its time. 

With much enthusiastic feeling, and a good deal 
of eloquent "spellbinding," Mr. Furbish glorified the 
legal tender greenback, and sneered at the gold bug 
and the silver bug. In the creation of abundant fiat 
money he beheld the relief and the regeneration of 
the poor, the solution of the social problem, and the 
coronation of justice as king over all the nations. As 
a basis for fiat money, after scornfully rejecting gold 
and silver, Mr. Furbish offered this, "the power of 
the people to collect a revenue. " In explanation he 
said, " It rests on the power of the government to col- 
lect a revenue beyond a tax, wider than a tax, taking 
more than you conceive is necessary for a tax, because 
it takes that value which the community created, 
which belongs to the community." Here appears to 
be the "single tax" plan for the confiscation of land 
Vu.lues presented as a basis for a paper currency, and 

in further illustration of his meaning he supposed the 
government engaged in building roads; it pays for the 
work in fiat money, this passes into circulation as cur- 
rency, and gets back to the government again as taxes. 
In the words of Mr. Furbish, " Issue your money from 
your government for services rendered. It goes from 
the government and passes from hand to hand in the 
transfer of commodities, and returns in the form of 
revenue to that government, forming the only honest 
and fair basis of circulation, and stops forever the 
power to maintain a corner in gold or silver." 

All that seems like building our monetary system 
on a cloud. The foundation on which Mr. Furbish 
would build a system of paper fiat money is just as in- 
tangible and fleeting as a cloud, because the govern- 
ment has not the rightful power of collecting " a revenue 
beyond a tax, wider than a tax, and more than is nec- 
essary for a tax," nor is a stable currency possible on 
such a shifting foundation as the expenditures of gov- 
ernment, because these are a drain on the resources 
of the people, and never can become an addition to 
their wealth. No fiat of the government can give a 
dollar's value to a piece of paper, nor will it pass cur- 
rent for a moment until commercial vitality is given to 
it by the express or implied promise of the govern- 
ment to redeem it in metallic money having the same 
value according to its weight before coining as after, 
and independent of the image and superscription 
stamped upon it. 

For centuries mankind has been afflicted with so- 
cial wrongs because of the political mistake of gov- 
ernments that they possess the prerogative of creating 
money. Markets, not governments, determine what 
is money. No matter what nominal value govern- 
ments may give to coins or paper bills, their actual 
value in exchange is fixed in the markets of the world. 
The commercial value given to a piece of paper by 
making it a legal tender in the payment of debts is a 
limited and abnormal value, a dishonest coercion of 
creditors, and the weakness of it appears in the fact 
that although government may compel a merchant to 
accept it in payment of a debt, it cannot compel him 
to receive it in payment for his goods. Here the fiat 
becomes impotent, and the legal tender usurpation 

The fiat experiment of the French republic is a les- 
son and a warning. This was much better money than 
our greenbacks, because it was not only legal tender 
in payment of debts but in payment for goods also ; 
and besides, it was secured by a pledge of real estate, 
the confiscated lands of the nobles and the clergy. It 
was better than a mortgage. The first issue was made 
on All Fools day 1790, and amounted to $80,000,000. 
This answered such an admirable purpose as what 
Mr. Furbish calls "a tool of trade," and was such an 



easy and picturesque addition to the national wealth, 
that paternal statesmanship multiplied it by three, and 
as there was no scarcity of paper and printing presses, 
$240,000,000 of this fiat money was issued before the 
end of the year. 

In addition to its "legal tender" and real estate 
security, this money was further supported by the 
fervent patriotism which then animated France. It 
was the mark of an aristocrat and traitor to discredit 
the money of the republic. Still, for all that, it was 
at a discount of ten per cent, on New Year's day 1791. 
It was alleged as a reason for this that there was not 
enough of it to satisfy the wants of trade. So they 
issued a million dollars more of it by September 1792, 
but in spite of every stimulant its credit languished, 
and before Christmas it was at a discount of thirty- 
seven per cent. 

The government greatly annoj'ed at the folly of the 
people who preferred coarse, materialistic silver and 
gold to "crisp" and pictorial paper, demonetised 
those unpatriotic metals, and forbade the use of them ; 
and in order that the dollar might have " a uniform 
purchasing power," they fixed the maximum price of 
bread, and meat, and coal, and other things; but by a 
strange oversight they neglected to say how much 
wheat should grow on an acre of land ; or how much 
wool a sheep should wear. They also made it a penal 
offense to ask an}' more for goods than the legal price ; 
or to refuse the legal tenders in pa}'ment for merchan- 
dise, and as the "volume" of the currency was not 
}'et large enough to restore confidence, to relieve the 
money market, to move the crops, to lift the mortgage, 
and perform other necessary miracles, they increased 
it by September 1793, to one thousand million dollars ; 
but the laws of the market were paramount over the 
laws of the land, and the fiat money was at a discount 
of 55 per cent. However, the printing press never 
tired, and the making of mone}' went on, until by the 
end of 1795, they had issued §4,000,000,000, and it 
was at a discount of 99 per cent. Then the govern- 
ment decreed the penalty of death against those who 
should discredit this money, or refuse to take it at its 
face value for all goods and commodities whatsoever ; 
and still feeling that the volume of it was insufficient 
for the wants of trade, thej' increased it to nine thou- 
sand million dollars, forty five thousand million francs. 
Then it reached par — it was worth nothing. And no 
fiat has been able to give it any value unto this day. 

The chief speaker on the other side was Mr. Lyman 
J. Gage, who traced the evolution of money from shells 
and coonskins up to gold and silver which now hold 
supreme dominion as money, by virtue of the inexor- 
able sentence that the fittest shall survive. " It does 
not need a moment's thought," said Mr. Gage, "to 
satisfy us that it was by a true survival of tlie Jitti-st 

that gold and silver finally obtained universal recogni- 
tion as money, and superseded all other forms of it." 
Further, he explained, that gold and silver are uni- 
versal money, not dependent upon coinage for its 
quality, nor upon statutes for its value. He showed 
the mistake of attributing to the stamp upon a coin 
the money value which really lies under it. He also 
denied that the legal tender sanction which the law 
places upon the issues of its mint gave any new and 
original value to such legal tender coin. 

Mr. Gage explained the apparent paradox that 
seventy-five cents worth of silver when coined into a 
dollar becomes equal to one hundred cents in gold. 
He showed that the cheaper dollar is indirectly re- 
deemed by the government, every time it is received 
for taxes at the value of a dollar in gold ; but he also 
said that the time would come when by reason of the 
superabundance of silver coins, the government would 
not be able to do this, but would be compelled to pay 
out silver dollars at their bullion value, thereby putting 
the business of the country on a silver basis, gold 
being driven out as currency, but earning a good liv- 
ing in the business of discounting silver and greenback 

Several other members of the club reinforced the 
arguments of Mr. Furbish, and Mr. Gage, by pertinent 
remarks, but nobody exposed that arrogant pretension 
of governments which impels them to interfere with 
money and its functions, especially that dishonest 
usurpation of authority to make anything whatever a 
legal tender in payment of debts. No earthlj^ power 
can do that. The law that attempts to do it is void 
in morals as it is mischievous in policy. A debt con- 
tains a moral obligation which none but the debtor 
can discharge. 

So, also, nobody denied the right of government 
to nickname coins in order to give them an arbitrary 
and artificial character expressive of no quality in the 
coins. Why not make an honest ounce of silver a 
monetary unit and name it truthfully an "Ounce." If 
the name of every coin expressed the actual weight of 
it, the multiple or fraction of an " Ounce," the people 
would not be so easilj' deceived by the fiscal tricks of 
governments. Florins, francs, dollars, and shillings, 
are deceitful nicknames, intended to conceal the qual- 
ity of the money they pretend to describe. They may 
be of different weights at different times, but no gov- 
ernment could coin three hundred grains of silver and 
call it an "Ounce" without being at once detected, 
nor could such a coin be made available to cheat the 
working man out of a part of his wages. 

The debate at the Sunset club while excellent as 
far as it went, would have been more instructive had 
it reached further down towards the moral elements 
of money and its functions. 





The nervous system is the physiological seat of 
morality. The breaking of the balance of the nervous 
system is, in that degree, the breaking up of morality, 
and is already hell. The nervous system is a delicate 
musical instrument ; if you disturb the least of its 
atoms the harmony begins to falter. It depends upon 
such apparently remote things as the girth of the chest, 
the lifting power, and the density of the flesh. There 
is a moment of utmost physical perfection and at that 
very moment the nervous system is playing the ninth 
symphony and singing supernal songs. A day indoors 
drives out Beethoven and shuts up heaven. A year 
at the counter, or desk, or dictionary, may forever 
cloud the face of God. When love dies God dies, said 
Tolstoi', if not in these words by suggestion in his won- 
derful title "Where love is there God is." Love and 
God are functions of the nervous system. In that 
moment of utmost physical perfection love is alive and 
God is there. God dies by inches out of most lives. 
These beautiful presences, God and love, depend on 
the love and God capacity. An ounce of food taken 
daily beyond the need of food banishes daily more than 
an ounce of God. The progressive atrophy of the 
tissues through want of use denotes the atrophy of 
God and love. Love is the self-annihilating instinct 
of one being in the presence of another — and the power 
of instincts is greatest in the prime of man. Love is 
charity, and in the immense recuperation morning of 
life generosity is supreme. 

Let us be not mocked. Age kills God. 

" What is it to grow old ? 

It is to spend long days 

And not once feel that we were ever young ; 

i feel. 

It is to suffer this, 

And feel but half, and feebly, wha 

Deep in our hidden heart 

Festers the dull remembrance of a change, 

But I 

We must grow old, but we need not grow prema- 
turely old. Every departure from the perfect physical 
life is expiated by premature age. Age neither suffers 
nor enjoys. Where feeling is not there God is not. 
The tranquility of an old man is not happiness. " Do 
you say that old age is unfeeling ? " asks Oliver Wen- 
dell Holmes. "It has not vital energy enough to sup- 
ply the waste of -the more exhausting emotions." Can 
we postpone old age? This is the question at the heart 
of all Bibles and moral treatises. This same youthful 
octogenarian. Dr. Holmes, gives us warning with 
genial sadness of what must happen to every daring 
survivor who scales the white peaks of age. " Nature's 
kindly anodyne is telling upon us more and more with 
every year. Our old doctors used to give an opiate 

* Matthew Arnold, Crowing Old. 

which they called 'the black drop.' It was stronger 
than laudanum, and, in fact, a dangerously powerful 
narcotic. Something like this is that potent drug in 
Nature's pharmacopoeia which she reserves for the 
time of need, — the later stages of life. She commonly 
begins administering it at about the time of the 'grand 
climacteric,' the ninth septennial period, the sixty- 
third year. More and more freely she gives it, as the 
years go on, to her grey-haired children, until, if they 
last long enough, every faculty is benumbed, and they 
drop off quietly into sleep under its benign influence." 
Happiness is contingent upon the degree of life and 
sensation, and these have ebbed low in the old man. 
"Time, the inexorable, does not threaten him with 
the scythe so often as with the sand bag. He does not 
cut, but he stuns and stupefies."* 

There are no tumultuous sufferings in age, but I 
cannot acquit the prematurely old of the sorrows of 
hell. In them "festers the dull remembrance of a 
change" that wisdom might have deferred. 

Physical and moral are at last one. They have the 
same root and trunk ; we differentiate them by analy- 
sis, and fictitiously. Moral pains are as physical as 
the hand or foot. They are the discomfiture of the 
physical elements, and are caused alike by infractions 
of the so-called moral law and by bodily distempers. 
A cold not only sharpens the knives of conscience but 
its effect is incipient moral insanity. We may be sure 
that conduct which in none of its consequences tends 
to the destruction of the physical is not immoral. The 
greater part of moral suffering in the world is the pro- 
duct of a misunderstanding. Actions are supposed to 
be injurious that are not injurious, and they are met 
with the moral lash. The moral castigation causes 
unmeasured suffering but suffering that was gratu- 
itous, mistaken, ignorance-born. " Terrible to me are 
the awful sufferings from trifles and unnecessary ca- 
tastrophies, " said Rakhmetof.f 

Thus at last all morality and all religion, all ques- 
tions of the conduct of life and the attainment of hap- 
piness and heaven and God, return in the grand sweep 
of the circle wherein the universe is compassed to 
this, — the perfection of man's body. Whatever goods 
we know are ascending goods while the sun of life 
goes up, lessening all the fading afternoon until dark- 
ness sombrely invests them and terminates all. It 
were worthy the ecstasies and sacrifices of all the best 
of a generation or of ten generations to establish this 
central and spheric character of the body ; at bottom 
the groping aim of fetish worshipper and priest and 
scientist in all generations since the cenozoic time, al- 
though obscured by many obscurations of theory, con- 
scious purpose and method. 

* Over the Tea Cups, p, 30. 

t In Tchermusheosky's A Vital Question 





To the Editor of The Open Court .■— 

I HAVE looked in vain in the literary periodicals of the last 
few years for any adequate notice of the Journal Intime of Henri 
Frederic Amiel, ' the lonely Genevese Professor ' as Mrs. Ward 
calls him in her Introduction to her admirable translation of the 
two volumes published by Macmillan & Co. in 1885. 

The authoress of "Robert Elsmere " declares that Amiel 
"speaks for the life' of to-day as no other single voice has yet 
spoken for it." As a contrifcutiofl of the religion of the future 
which is sure to arise, and which is indeed now well above the 
horizon, the thoughts and speculations of our author are invaluable. 
As formative influences leading to the highest, most spiritual, 
truly religious life I would place in the hands of our young people 
these two precious volumes with the valuable Introduction, and 
the writings of our own Emerson, I am more and more persuaded 
the older I grow, that it is not the quantity so much as the quality 
of what one reads and digests that tells. The author of " Nature," 
" The Conduct of Life," and the other priceless essays, enlarges, 
enriches, and enlightens the mind perhaps more than any other 
writer of our day. The great secret of his charm and influence 
is, that his is an essentially modern mind, Emerson like Amiel 
speaks most emphatically for the " life of to-day," " Every man is 
a scholar potentially and does not need any one good so much as 
this of right thought," says Emerson, and adds "the true scholar 
is the Church. Only the duties of intellect must be owned. Down 
with these dapper trimmers and sychophants ! Let us have mas- 
culine and divine men, formidable law-givers, Pythagoras, Plato, 
Aristotle, who wajp the churches of the world from their tradi- 
tions and penetrate them through and through with original per- 
ception. The intellectual man lives in perpetual victory." And 
now to return after our digression to Amiel. No question is so im- 
portant and so deeply interesting as the religious question — or in 
other words the question of the so-called supernatural. Is religion 
possible without a belief in or at Meast acceptance of miracles ? 
Now hear Amiel on this subject. In a notice of Ernest Havet's 
" Origines du Christianisme, " he says ; " The author for instance 
has no clear idea of religion ; and his philosophy of history is su- 
perficial. He is a Jacobin. ' The Republic and Free Thought ' — 
he cannot get beyond that. This curt and narrow school of opin- 
ion is the refuge of men of independent' mind, who have been 
scandalised by the colossal fraud of ultramontanism ; but it leads 
rather to cursing history than to understanding it. It is the crit- 
icism of the eighteenth century, of which the general result is 
purely negative. But Voltairianism is only the half of the philo- 
sophic mind. Hegel frees thought in a very different way. Havet 
too, makes another mistake. He regards Christianity as synony- 
mous with Roman Catholicism and with the Church. I know very 
well that the Roman Church does the same, and that with her the 
assimilation is a matter of sound tactics ; but scientifically it is in- 
exact. We ought not even to identify Christianity with the Gos- 
pel, nor the Gospel with religion in general. It is the business of 
critical precision to clear away these perpetual confusions in which 
Christian practice and CBristian preaching abound. To disen- 
tangle ideas, to distinguish and limit them, to fit them into their 
true place and order, is the first duty of science whenever it lays 
hold upon such chaotic and complex things as manners, idioms, 
or beliefs. Entanglement is the condition of life; order and clear- 
ness are the signs of serious and successful thought. Formerly 
it was the ideas of nature which were a tissue of errors and inco- 
herent fancies ; now it is the turn of moral and psychological 
ideas. The best issue from the present Babel would be the for- 
mation or the sketching out of a truly scientific science of man." 

One more quotation to illustrate the manner in which such a con- 
summate scholar as Amiel approaches this great subject of re- 
ligion, " But does the study of nature allow of the maintenance 
of those local revelations which are called Mosaism, Christianity, 
Islamism ? These religions, founded upon an infantine cosmog- 
ony, and upon a chimerical history of humanity, can they bear 
confronting with modern astronomy and geology ? The present 
mode of escape, which consists in trying to satisfy the claims of 
both science and faith — of the science which contradicts all the 
ancient beliefs, and the faith which in the case of things that are 
beyond nature and incapable of verification, affirms them on her 
own responsibility only. This mode of escape cannot last for- 
ever; ■ Every fresh cosmical concepfion demands a religion which 
corresponds to it." 

There is another book which if rich in suggestions and full of 
"formative influences." Renan's " Recollections of my Youth," 
translated by C, B, Pitman and published by G, P. Putnam's 
Sons, 1883. The preface is especially worth reading over and 
over again. Allow me to give you one or two quotations from the 
book itself. "The very effort to shake off opinions in some re- 
spects unreasonable, had its advantages. Because a Paris flibber- 
tigibbet disposes with a joke of creeds, from which Pascal with all 
his reasoning powers, could not shake himself free, it must not be 
concluded that the i^anmhe is superior to Pascal. I confess that 
I at times fee! humiliated to think that it cost me five or six years 
of arduous research, and the study of Hebrew, the Semitic Ian- 
languages, Gesenius and Ewald to arrive at the result which this 
urchin achieves in a twinkling. These pilings of Pelion upon 
Ossa seem to me when looked at in this light, a mere waste of 
time. But Pere Hardoura observed that he had not got up at 
four o'clock every morning for forty years to think as all the 
world thought, So I am loath to admit that I have been at so 
much pains to fight a mere chimera bombinans. No, I cannot 
think that my labors have been all in vain, nor that victory is to 
be won in theology as cheaply as the scoffers would have us be- 
lieve. There are, in reality, but few people who have a right not to 
believe in Christianity. If the great mass of people only knew 
how strong is the net woven by the theologians, how difficult it is 
to break the threads of it, how much erudition has been spent 
upon it, and what a power of criticism is required to unravel it all. 
.... I have noticed that some men of talent who have set them- 
selves too late in life the task have been taken in the toils and 
have not been able to extricate themselves." 

Once more one of the most learned and certainly distinguished 
of modern Frenchmen declares, " I no longer believe Christianity 
to be the supernatural summary of all that men can know ; but I 
still believe that life is the most frivolous of things, unless it is re- 
garded as one great and constant duty. Oh ! my beloved old 
teachers," he exclaims, "Yes, I have said that your history was 
very short measure, that your critique had no existence, and that 
your natural philosophy fell far short of that which leads us to 
accept as a fundamental dogma, ' There is no special supeinat- 
ura! :' but in the main I am still your disciple." " Life is only of 
value by devotion to what is true and good." 

In conclusion allow me to call your attention to a very re- 
markable address by Principal Fairbairn at the opening of Mans- 
field College, Oxford, in 18S9, and published in the Contiiiiporary 
Review during the summer, I think, of that year — one or two quo- 
tations must suffice, but I trust that your readers will turn to the 
address and ponder every word of it, especially as it was written 
by an orthodox clergyman. "If the history of the Universities 
proves anything, it is this ; that it is impossible to exclude from 
them religion and religious questions. The local or the peculiar 
may be shut out, but the universal, the all pervading cannot be 
expelled. Now religion is as it were the one ubiquitous spirit in 
the realm of knowledge, pierce the realm at any part and you are 



sure to touch religion, ... It is impossible to study literature and 
take no account of the Supreme Book of our race, with the im- 
mense literature it has created in every tongue used by civilized 
man. . . . The body of truth is one, as the spirit of religion is 
ubiquitous, and to dissect it into a multitude of isolated atoms, 
each limited to its own small point in space without contact or 
connection with any other, would be to make a circle of the sciences 
and a university which embodies it alike impossible. . . . Men who 
believe dare not be silent about their beliefs. The enthusiasm of 
faith lives all the more intensely that its right to be is denied ; and 
the very attempt to teach knowledge without religion would evoke 
the victorious and protesting resistance of the men who believe 
that all knowledge is religious." 

I have been a constant reader of your valuable paper from 
its beginning, and I know, there are men who have long forsaken 
the old dogmas or more truly have exhausted and appropriated 
their meaning and significance, but who still believe with Renan 
that all religions maybe defective and partial ; but religion is none 
the less a divine element in humanity, and the mark of a superior 
fate, and with Goethe that God is now constantly active in the 
higher natures to attract the lower ones. I would counsel all such — 
strongly and their name is legion — to ' read, and inwardly digest ' 
Emerson's writings, Amiel's Journal, Kenan's "Recollections of 
my Youth," Principal Fairbairn's' address, Mansfield College. 
Oxford, Contemporary Review, 1889. 

Cannes, France. Atherton Blight. 


The Utility AND Morality OF Vivisection. By C. Core', LL.D., 

F. R. S. London ; J. W. Kolckmann. 

That this pamphlet, which is issued by the Association for 
the Advancement of Medicine by Research, will have any effect 
over the mind of what may be termed the sentimental anti-vivisec- 
lonist we do not believe. It is nevertheless an admirable contri- 
jutioli to the controversy, and its perusal would convince any un- 
prejudiced reader that the indiscriminate charges made against 
vivisectors of cruelty and immorality are quite unjustified. Dr. 
Gore well summarises the question when he says "the painful 
alternative of the present case is — either experiments on animals 
must be made, or the wholesale pain, disease, and slaughter of 
man and other animals by pestilences, epidemics, small-pox, scar- 
latina, foot and mouth disease, anthrax, etc. , and especially through 
ignorance, must continue almost unabated" (p. 18). Undoubtedly 
vivisection is the lesser of the two evils, and, as the author points 
out, those who are opposed to it are enemies to animal welfare, as 
the knowledge gained by it " is more applicable to the preserva- 
tion of the lives of animals than of man." 

Dr. Gore is probably right when he says that the opposition 
to vivisection comes, with little exception, from sentimental 
persons and others professing religion, those who in all ages have 
opposed scientific research ; the author thinks it is reasonable to 
infer, therefore, "that it is largely directed against the discovery 
of new knowledge, and the question of infliction of pain is far 
from being the only consideration." This view is supported by 
extracts from anti-vivisection publications, some of the statements 
in which Dr. Gore charitably suggests have " either been made in 
ignorance of some of the fundamental truths of science, or cara» 
lessly, not observing that they were incorrect." S2. 


The committee appointed to award the prize of one thousand 
dollars for the best essay, treatise, or manual, adapted to aid and 
assist teachers in our free public schools, in the Girard college for 
orphans, and other public or charitable institutions, have decided 
that no one manuscript presented met the conditions of the offer. 

but that two of them together did, clearly showing that morality 
can be taught without teaching theology and ho-o to do it. The 
prize was ordered to be equally divided between Nicholas Paine 
Gilman, A. M., editor of the Lilcrary World, Boston, and Edward 
Payson Jackson, A.M., Professor of Physical Science in the Latin 
School of Boston. Both treatises "The Laws of Daily Conduct, 
a Manual of Practical Morals for Teachers and Parents," by Mr. 
Gilman, and "Dr. Don's Morning Talks: A Colloquy on Good 
Morals," by Mr. Jackson, will appear in one volume by next fall. 








THE SQUARING OF THE CIRCLE. The History o£ the Problem from the 
Most Ancient Times to the Present Day. HERMANN SCHUBERT. 

THE CRITERION OF TRUTH. A Dissertation on the Method of Verifica- 
tion. EDITOR. 

chology of the Star-Fish. CARUS STERNE. 











All communications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 


BELIEF IN GOD. The Gifford Lectures. Prof. F. Max 

Mueller ; 2731 


M. M. Trumbull 2734 


Morrison I. Swift 2736 


Apostles of the Religion of the Future. Atherton 

Blight 2737 


NOTES 2738 




The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion ^A^ith Science. 

No. I 86. (Vol. V.-4 ) 

CHICAGO, MARCH 19, 1891. 

\ Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



How inevitable that the early races and peoples 
should have subordinated the sun and moon etc. to 
the earth. They are clearly the servants and attend- 
ants of the earth. The}' are placed there in the heavens 
to give us light and warmth. As the sun sinks towards 
the horizon a change seems actually to come over 
him. His light grows thin and yellow. His day's work 
is done and he is going to rest, and in the morning 
will rise refreshed and strong.- In winter the winds 
and the storms seem to drive him to the south, and 
he is feeble and disheartened. 

Until science enlightens us we never dream that 
the sunset or sunrise is not a solar phenomenon, that 
these changes relate entirely to our little planet, that 
winter and summer, day and night, etc., are not uni- 
versal phenomena, but local, and as it were, personal 
phases of our planetary life. 

Now the Semitic cosmogony upon which our the- 
ology is founded is the outcome of this same feeling, 
this same geocentric conception of the universe. It 
magnifies the individual into the universal. The Lon- 
don Spectator in replying to Frederic Harrison, who 
thinks the Christian faith could not possibly have been 
first originated in an age that had a heliocentric as- 
tronom}', sets forth and enforces the opinion that our 
astronomical science has not in any vital respect al- 
tered or impaired the validity of the theological con- 
ceptions of the Jewish and Christian revelations. The 
Spectator [mXs to see that theSemitic dramaturgy sprang 
out of the colossal egotism of the early races, the races 
who considered themselves as the special centre and 
object of creations, an egotism that science tends di- 
rectly to overthrow. It is true the old prophets and 
biblical writers sought to humble and belittle man in 
the presence of the hosts of the starry heavens, but 
this was only a momentary reaction from their gigan- 
tic egoism, which made Jehovah so solicitous about 
his chosen people. But this is not the point. The 
point is that the Copernican system of astronomy 
gives us a conception of the order and harmony 
of the universe and of . the physical insignificance 
of our planet and its subordination to other bodies 
that is utterly inconsistent with our Semitic theol- 

ogy. The two are not homogeneous ; they spring 
from entirely different standpoints. The Israelites 
may have been God's chosen people, and this earth 
of ours may be the apple of his eye among the 
worlds, but the tendency of the study of science is to 
utterly uproot such notions. Science liberalises and 
impersonalises. To the irnpartial student of history 
all peoples are God's people, and all worlds alike the 
scenes of his power. In the light of modern astronomy 
what becomes of the notion that the heavens are above 
us, far away, and are of a higher and purer creation, 
or Hell beneath us, that the earth is corrupted or 
blighted by the Fall ? Kindred notions of one theologj'. 
Do we not know that the earth is a star in the heav- 
ens, as incorruptible and undefiled as the rest? and 
that all worlds are kindred and of our stuff, that there 
is no up and no down, no high or no low in the uni- 
verse ? The lightning does not come out of heaven, 
nor the rain out of heaven, but out of the clouds. An 
eclipse is not a warning or a calamity, but purely a 
natural event, merely the lunar or the terrestrial 
shadow. Our actual physical smallness and insignifi- 
cance is what science reveals ; our grandeur and im- 
portance is what the ej'e and the untutored mind be- 

Science is impersonal ; it tends to belittle and dif- 
fuse man ; theology and literature tend to exalt him, 
and concentrate him, and set him above all. Mythol- 
ogy, theology, philosophy, literature, all exaggerate 
man and distort his true relations to the universe ; but 
in these latter ages comes science and shows man 
what he really is, where he belongs in the scheme of 
the whole and what an insect of an hour, an ephemera 
of a moment he really is, and what a bubble is the 
world he inhabits. In a late religious work by Julia 
Wedgewood I find this remark : 

"When once Galileo and Newton had forced the world to 
recognise that Heaven, if it was anywhere was everywhere, the 
moral took a new direction. The antithesis of Heaven and Earth 
vanished from the inward as well as from the outward world. 
Human nature became interesting for its own sake." 


One of the most liberal minded doctors of divinity 

allowed himself the other day to speak slightingly of 

the "vaunted scientific method," as if the scientific 

method was some new fangled notion that had recently 



become current, some patent process or labor saving 
machine for obtaining truth. As if men had not always 
used the scientific method, as if it was not as natural 
to the mind as walking to the body. When we sift 
evidence, or search into the truth or falsity of any ob- 
jective proposition we inevitably use the scientific 
method. It is the method of proceeding from cause 
to effect, of proving all things, of testing every link 
in the chain which binds one fact to another. It has 
come into prominence in our time because of the great 
advance of physical science. Men are applying this 
method to questions that heretofore have been con- 
sidered above its reach. Theological questions are 
brought within its range, much to the disgust of the 
theologians. Of many things that have been taken 
for granted men are beginning to ask, Are they true ? 
and are applying the tests of this kind of truth. All 
the events and occurrences recorded in the Bible, are 
subject to the inquiry, Are they true ? If we apply to 
them the scientific method what is the result ? James 
Martineau, for instance, makes use of the scientific 
method when he shows so convincingly that the Syn- ' 
optic Gospels must all have been derived from one 
common source. If these records, he says, were in- 
dependent accounts of the words and doings of Jesus 
by the disciples whose names they bear, it is incred- 
ible that they should agree so closely in all their de- 
tails ; the different writers would have witnessed and 
would have recorded different scenes and events. Only 
of one-thirteenth of the days of the public life of Jesus 
do we have any record in the Synoptic Gospels. Were 
these gospels each an original, or the record of inde- 
pendent witnesses, we should have had the events and 
the utterances of Jesus on more days, since the apos- 
tles would not all have been absent and all present at 
precisely the same time. 

The scientific method can no more be ignored or 
disputed than can the multiplication table. It is as 
old as the reason of man and is fallible only as man's 
reason is fallible. It cannot be applied to matters of 
religious faith, because we here enter a region where 
proof or verification is not possible. 

In the ancient temple of Apollo at Delphi lay a 
stone, the Omphalos, or navel stone, supposed to mark 
the centre of the earth. And sure enough, it did mark 
the centre of the earth, though not exactly under the 
conditions the ancients believed. The ancients sup- 
posed the earth had one centre, like a plain or any 
irregular surface, or as the navel is the centre of the 
body ; but we know now that the earth is a sphere, 
and that any point upon its surface may serve as its 
centre. In like manner every religion thinks itself 
the one final and supreme religion, — thinks itself the 

centre of the world ; and for that race and that people 
it is the centre of the world-; their life, their history, 
their development hinges upon it. Our navel stone, 
Christianity, is the centre of the world for us, and the 
Buddhist's, the Mohammedan's is the centre of the 
world for him. The religion of Apollo was the central 
fact in the history of Greece. There may be any num- 
ber of true, though opposing and contradictory re- 
ligions. There may be any number of centres to the 
infinite. Mathematics, the exact sciences, are always 
and everywhere the same, but religion is a sentiment, 
and the forms in which it clothes itself are as various 
as changeable as' fleeting as the forms of summer 


The whole order of the universe favors virtue and 
is against vice. Things have come to what the}' are, 
man has arrived at what he is, the grass and flowers 
clothe the fields, the trees thrive and bear wholesome 
fruit, the air is sweet and water quenches thirst through 
the action of the same principles by which we see that 
virtue is good and vice bad. Things have clashed 
and warred and devoured each other through past 
eternities and out of the adjustment, the balance at 
which they have at last arrived, we see that virtue is 
to be sought and vice to be shunned ; we see that a 
good man's life is the fruit of the same balance and 
proportion as that which makes the fields green and 
the corn ripen. It is not by some fortuitous circum- 
stance, the especial favor of some god, but by living 
in harmony with immutable laws through which the 
organic world has' been evolved, that he is what he is. 

To say that the world or the order of nature is rea- 
sonable is like saying how well the body fits the skin. 
The order of nature fits our faculties and appears rea- 
sonable to us, not because it is shaped to them, but 
because they are shaped to it, just as the eye is shaped 
to the light or the ear to the waves of sound. Nature 
is first and man last. Things are good to us because 
our constitutions are shaped to them ; no absolute 
goodness is argued. Fluids might seem like solids to 
beings differently constituted. Were the laws of the 
physical world designed to bring about certain re- 
sults, or do the results simply follow? Shall we say 
that the inclination of the earth's axis to the plane of 
its orbit, is in order that there may be a change of sea- 
son ? or does the change of the season simply follow 
as an inevitable consequence? Is the air adapted to 
the lungs or the lungs to the air? Of course the les- 
ser or secondary fact is always adjusted to the greater 
or primary fact. The structure of a bird, the mechan- 
ism of its wings and feathers, etc., is all adapted with 
the nicest accuracy to the one purpose of flying, but 



is there anything here we can properly call design ? 
The wing we know is the result of slow adaptation and 
modification, and not of anything like deliberate con- 
trivance. God did not will that certain creatures should 
fly, and so proceed to make them wings and feathers. 
With disuse the wing disappears or becomes rudi- 
mentary. Use therefore makes the wing. What makes 
use ? 

Some mysterious impulse imprinted upon the organ- 
isation of which we know nothing. What I am trying 
to say is, there is nothing like man's ways, nothing ar- 
tificial in nature — nothing in the finite that is copied 
from the infinite. Will, design, purpose, are partial 
terms. God is all will, all purpose, just as the sphere 
is all form, that is holds all form, and yet is of itself 
of no form. The circle goes in all directions, and yet 
in no direction. 


Behold how men have puzzled themselves over 
miracles, and what ingenuity they have shown in ex- 
plaining them ; but it were better had the puzzles 
never been made. After the theologian has explained 
so clearly how they happen, the previous question 
still haunts us do they happen ? Principal Telloch's 
explanation of them seems a very simple one. Mira- 
cles, he says, are simply the working of a Higher Will 
so moving the "hidden springs of nature that a new 
issue arises on given circumstances. The ordinary 
issue is supplanted b}- a higher issue." In other words, 
have given the same conditions unlike results may 
follow by reason of the interference of this assumed 
Higher Will. But are we not constantly dogged by 
the question, What proof have we that this Higher 
Will does so interfere ? In assuming that it interferes 
are -we not begging the whole question? One of Plu- 
tarch's natural questions was "What is the reason that 
pebble stones and leaden bullets thrown into the water 
made it more cold ?" and after he was given the reason, 
we still want to know, do these things make water 
more cold? 

The belief in miracles is a remnant of paganism, 
which the race is fast outgrowing. The religious 
sense of mankind is fast rising superior to all thau- 
maturgical aids. The conception of the forces of na- 
ture as constant, the view of the universe as a vital 
whole, softly but inexorably bound by the law of cause 
and effect in all its parts, is a much more noble and 
satisfying view to me at least, than that which has been 
foisted upon the world by an antiquated theology. 

Think of the state of mind of the world when peo- 
ple actually believed in the devil, — not believed that 
they believed in him as now-a days, but when they 
believed in him as really as they believed in heat and 

cold, night and day, life and death ; when doctors and 
theologians guarded their mouths while exorcising the 
evil spirit lest he jump down their throats. If a man 
inhaled a little fly by accident his reason might be un- 
hinged by terror lest he had swallowed the devil. The 
king of Spain used to sleep between two monks to 
keep off the devil. What a dreadful hue was given 
to life by this belief ; in what a constant state of ap- 
prehension and alarm men lived ! The insane were of 
course possessed of the devil; all evil, storms, pesti- 
lence, disease, everything malodorous was the work 
of evil spirits. 


Christianity amounts to little without something to 
back it up, without integrity of character and fealty 
to truth. You may put on a varnish of religion as 
thick as you please, if the stuff beneath is poor, is 
shaky or full of knots, the result is poor. Our final 
reliance is always upon the man himself and not upon 
his creed. We care little what he believes or disbe- 
lieves, so that he believes in sobriety, justice, charity, 
and the imperativeness of duty, so that he speak the 
truth and shame the. devil, and I reckon it is about so 
with God himself. What mankind, in their better 
selves love, can hardly fail to be acceptable to him. 
Atheism, itself, if sincere, and honest, is more in keep- 
ing with the order of the world than a cowardly and 
lukewarm deism. Belief in Christ will not save a man; 
he must be saved already or he is lost, saved by his 
character and conscience, or there is no material for 
belief in Christ to work upon. How many people we 
see who freely and heartily subscribe to the thirty- 
nine articles, yet in whom we have no confidence, and 
with whom we want no intimate relations. And it is 
not because they are hypocrites : it is because they are 
incapable of truthfulness or manliness. Belief is not 
saving, but character is. How shall we get character 
then ; how deepen and fertilise the groundwork of 
men's natures? It cannot be done in a moment : con- 
version will not do it. When a man of force and in- 
tegrity joins the church, the church has an acquisi- 
tion; but when a slippery, inconstant, and equivocating 
person joins it, it has put a brick in its walls that will 
not stand the weather. The frosts and the rains will 
crumble it, and the structure be weakened. Character 
is of slow growth ; it cannot be made to order ; the 
most that can be done to encourage or stimulate it, is 
to lay the emphasis where it belongs, to insist upon 
things that are essential, to stop trjang to convert men 
to a creed, but to open their eyes to a law, show them 
the penalties of fickleness, falsehood, intemperance, 
unchastity, riotous living, etc., not because they con- 
travene some command or precept of the Bible, or be- 
cause they endanger their chances of felicity in some 
other world, but because they contravene the laws 



through which all growth, and health, and wholeness 
come, and endanger their well-being here and now. 
The preacher cannot create force and integrity off- 
hand in his hearer by praising force and integrity, but 
a great deal is gained when a love for these things is 
awakened. Men are made manly by an appeal to their 
manliness ; noble sentiments are begotten by noble 
sentiments ; when the true patriot speaks everybody 
is patriotic ; when the real Christian appears every- 
body loves Christianity. I once heard Fred Douglass 
say the way to keep a man out of the mud was to 
black his boots, and the first step towards making a 
man manly is to convince him he has a capacity for 
manliness. Show him that religion is not some far 
away thing that he must get, but a vital truth which 
he lives whenever he does a worthy thing. 

Religion, as something special and extra, which a 
man may or may not have, and which is attached to 
certain beliefs and ceremonies, has had its day. What- 
ever it may have been in the past, it is no longer a power 
to mould men's characters and shape their lives. That 
a man professes religion is no' longer a recommenda- 
tion to him, in applying for any place in the business 
or political world. It does not inspire any more con- 
fidence in him as a man, or as a trusted servant, but 
creates a certain presumption against him. He may 
be a wolf in sheep's clothing : watch him closely. A 
commonplace poet derives great advantages from the 
stock forms and measures which he uses ; these are 
the garments of mighty bards ; let him discard them 
and his littleness and poverty will appear. So a man 
often hides his mean and selfish nature in loud pro- 
fessions of religion ; let him drop these and stand 
upon his own merits, and we shall not be imposed 
upon. When such an one fails we excuse the mat- 
ter by saying, "Well it was not the fault of the re- 
ligion, but of the man." The fault is in attaching any 
religious value to forms and beliefs — in having any 
cloaks of this kind in which a scoundrel may mas- 
querade. If a man professes to be a legal or medical 
or scientific expert, and is not, he is soon found out. 
This is not a cloak, but a sword, and if he cannot 
wield it, he is soon exposed. But a man may profess 
Christianity to-day and rob a bank to-morrow. Prob- 
ably no honest mind ever gave its assent to the Hteral 
truth of the thirty-nine articles, or to any of the va- 
rious creeds, until its sympathy and its interest had 
been brought over by an appeal to the emotions. The 
creed is an after-thought ; it is the terms which the 
conscience makes with the reason after the reason has 
surrendered. In assenting to it the convert thinks he 
is only assenting to the truth of his religion, or to the 
genuineness of the emotion he has experienced. May- 
hap by and by he discovers that he has assented to a 
set of propositions, which standing naked and formal 

as they do, divested of the spiritual warmth and mag- 
netism, and the incentives to noble and heroic living 
which they had in the fervid exhortations of Paul, or 
in the calm sweetness of James, and which his reason 
alone is now to lay hold of, he is shocked and repelled, 
and is in danger of losing all his religion with the dis- 
covery of the unreasonableness of his creed. This is 
unfortunate, because the only thing real and valuable 
in religion, the only thing saving in it, is the emotjon 
of Godliness, the love of Christ, of tenderness, 
gentleness, purity, mercy, truth. Without these, re- 
ligion is nothing but a name, and with them the as- 
sent of the understanding to a lot of formal proposi- 
tions about the plans and purposes of the Eternal, 
about the trinity, or the atonement, or original sin, 
etc., has nothing to do. There is no connection be- 
tween these things. R,eligion is not a matter of rea- 
son or of belief, any more than poetry is. It is a sen- 



Nothing is more frequent or better known than the 
momentary dispossession of personality through some 
fixed and intense idea. So long as this idea occupies 
the consciousness, we might without much exagger- 
ation say that it constitutes the individual. The ob- 
stinate pursuit of any problem, invention or research 
in all their various forms, represents a mental state in 
which the entire personality has been drained for the 
benefit of a single idea. Such an one is, to use a com- 
mon expression, absent, that is automatic. Here there 
is an abnormal state, implying a rupture of equilib- 
rium. Numberless current anecdotes concerning either 
rational or chimerical inventors bear witness to the 
fact. And incidentally let us' observe, that every fixed 
idea is at the bottom a sentiment or a fixed passion. 
At all times some desire, love, hatred, or interest will 
support the idea, and impart to it its intensity, stability, 
tenacity. Whatever we may plead to the contrary, 
ideas are always in the service of passions ; at the 
same time they resemble some masters, who actually 
obey while believing that they always rule. 

Whatever may be the result, this state is but a 
mental hypertrophy, and people perfectly right, 
when in identifying the inventor and his work, they 
designate the one by the other; in this instance work 
is equivalent to personality. 

Up to this point we have no change of person- 
alit}', but a simple deviation from the normal type, 
— or, what is better, the schematic type, — in which 
by hypothesis the organic, emotional, and intellectual 
elements would form a perfect consensus. We thus 

♦Translated from the French [Diseases of Personality Chap. ni. 4.} by 



have hypertrophy at one point and atrophy at other 
points, by virtue of the law of compensation or of 
organic equiHbrium. And now let us consider the 
morbid cases. With the exception of certain artificial 
changes, produced during hypnotism, it is difficult to 
find many cases of derangem.ent the incontestable 
starting point of which is an idea. Among changes 
of personality, from an intellectual cause, it appears 
to me we may class the facts relating to lycanthropy 
and zoanthropy, in all their forms, formerly of fre- 
quent occurrence, but now very rare. Still, in all cases 
of this kind* of which we have an authentic record, 
the mental debility in the lycanthrope is so great, al- 
most verging on stupidity, that we might almost be 
tempted to look upon it as a case of retrogression ; a 
return toward the form of animal individualit}'. Let 
us add, that inasmuch as these cases are complicated 
with visceral disorders, cutaneous and visual hallu- 
cinations, it is not easy to see, whether they are the 
effects of a preconceived idea, or whether they them- 
selves produce it. We must remark, however, that 
lycanthropy has at times been epidemic, which is to 
say, that at least in imitating subjects, it must have 
originated in some fixed idea. Finally, this type of 
disease disappeared, when people no longer believed 
in it, that is to say, when the idea that a man is a 
wolf, could no longer fix itself in the brain of an in- 
dividual, and make him act accordingly. 

The only perfectly clear cases of ideal trans- 
formation of personality, are those of men who be- 
lieve themselves women, and of women who believe 
themselves men, without any sexual anomaly justi- 
fying that metamorphosis. With subjects who are 
possessed, demonomaniacs, the influence of an idea 
also seems initial or preponderating. It frequently 
acts by contagion upon the exorcists themselves. To 
quote only one instance of this. Father Surin, who for 
so long a time was concerned in the notorious affair 
the Ursuline Nuns of Loudun, felt within himself two 
souls, and sometimes as it seems, even three. f 

* See Calmeil : Dt la folie cansideree sous le point tie vuc pnthologitjue , 
pkilosophique, histori,)ut et judiciaire. Vol. i, Bk. Ill, Ch. II, Sg g, 16, 17; 
Bk. IV, Ch. II, § I. 

t P. Surin left a detailed report of liis own mental state : Histoire dcs 
diabUs de Loudun, p. 217 and following. " I am not able to describe to you 
what is going on within nie at such a time (he alludes to the time when the 
demon passes from the body of the possessed woman into his own), and how 
that spirit unites itself with mine, without depriving me either of conscious- 
ness or of the freedom of my soul, yet becoming like another ego of myself, 
and as if I had two souls, of which one is dispossessed of its body, and of the 
use of its organs, and compelled to keep aloof, looking merely upon the doings 
of the other intruding soul. The two spirits wrestle together in the same field, 
which is the body, and the soul is as though it was divided. Accordirg to tlie 
one side of its ego, the soul is the subject of the diabolical impressions, and 
according to the other side it is the subject of the movements proper to it, or 
that God gives to it. When— through the movement of one of these two souls 
— I wish to make a sign of the cross upon somebody's lips, the other soul very 
quickly turns my hand and seizes my finger to bite it furiously with the teeth. 
.... When I wish to speak, I am stopped short; at table I cannot raise a 
morsel of food to my mouth ; at confession I suddenly forget my sins and I 
feel the demon coining and going within me as in his own house " 

In Other words, the transformations of personality 
by effect of an idea are not of a very frequent occur- 
rence ; and this is a fresh proof of what we have 
again and again repeated, that personality rises from 
below. It is in the highest nervous centres that per- 
sonality attains its unity, affirms itself with full con- 
sciousness ; in them it completes itself. If through 
some inverse mechanism personality descends from 
above to below, it will remain superficial, precarious, 

The creation of artificial personalities with hj'pno- 
tised subjects affords an excellent proof of the above ; 
and to this effect M. Ch. Richet has published very 
abundant and precise observations,* which I shall 
briefly quote. By turns they mak-e the hypnotised 
subject (usually a woman) believe that she is a peasant- 
girl, an actress, a general, an archbishop, a nun, a 
sailor, a little girl, etc., and the. subject will play all 
these parts to the degree of perfect illusion. Here the 
psychological data are perfectly clear. In this state 
of provoked somnambulism, the real personality re- 
mains intact ; the organic, emotional, intellectual ele- 
ments have not undergone any important change ; but 
all remain in a potential state. An imperfectly under- 
stood condition of nervous centres, an arrest of func- 
tion, prevents them from passing into action. An 
idea is evoked by way of suggestion, and at once, 
through the mechanism of association, it excites anal- 
ogous states of consciousness, and no others ; and 
with them, — always by association, — appropriate ges- 
tures, acts, words, and sentiments. In this manner 
there is constituted a personality external to the real 
personality, composed of borrowed and automatic ele- 
ments. Experiments of this kind clearly show what 
an idea may achieve when freed from all control, and 
reduced to its own power and destitute of the support 
and co-operation of the individual in its totality. 

In certain cases of incomplete hypnotism a dual- 
ism is produced. Dr. North, professor of physiology 
at Westminster Hospital, says, when speaking of the 
period during which he was affected by the fixed 
look: "I was not unconscious, but it seemed to me 
that I was existing in double. I imagined that within 
there existed another ego, perfectly alive to all that 
happened, but which did not care to interfere with 
the acts of the external ego, or to control them. The 
repugnance or incapacity of this internal ego to con- 
trol the external ego seemed to increase in proportion 
as the situation was further prolonged." 

But, would it be possible to suppress this true, in- 
ternal personality ? Can the real character of the in- 
dividual be reduced to naught or to the point of actu- 

» Ri-due Phllosophiiiue , "iA&xch 1883. M. Richet has published 11 
observations in his hooW Iwmme ct I' inUUigence, p. 539 and 541 
Carpenter : Menial Physiology, p, 562 and following. 

2 744 


ally transforming itself into itscontrary ? We cannot 
doubt this possibility ; the persisting authority of the 
operator is indeed able to effect this result, after a 
more or less prolonged resistance. Thus M. Ch. 
Richet has impressed with radical republican ideas a 
lady known for her ultra-Bonapartist opinions. Braid, 
after hynotising a strict teetotaller, several times re- 
peated to him that he was drunk. " This affirmation 
being also corroborated by a sensation of staggering 
(produced by way of muscular suggestion), and it was 
amusing to behold him divided between this imposed 
idea and the conviction resulting from his ordinary 
habits." This momentary metamorphosis however 
has nothing alarming about it. As M. Richet justly 
remarks, "in these curious modifications the changes 
that take place are only in the external form of the 
being, in habit and general attitudes and not in in- 
dividuality properly so called. " As to the question, 
whether by means of reiterated suggestions, we might 
not eventually produce in susceptible subjects a gen- 
uine modification of character, it is a problem that 
experience alone can solve. 

Perhaps this is a favorable opportunity to call at- 
tention to the phenomenon known as disappearance- of 
personality, which the mystics of all epochs and of all 
countries have described according to their own ex- 
perience, often in the most glowing language.* Pan- 
theistic metaphysicians without reaching the state of 
ecstasy have also spoken of a state in which the spirit 
thinks itself " under the form of eternitj' "; appears to 
itself as beyond time and space, free from all contin- 
gent modality, one with the infinite. This psycholo- 
gical phenomenon although rare must not be forgotten. 
I take it to be the absolute dispossession of men- 
tal activity effected by a single idea (positive to mys- 
tics, negative to empirics), but which through its 
high degree of abstraction, and its absence of deter- 
mination and limit, contradicts and excludes all indi- 
vidual sentiment. But let one single sensation how- 
ever ordinary be perceived and the entire illusion will 
be destroyed. 

*Qf these descriptions I shall only cite one— the nearest to us by lan- 
guage and time. " It seems to me that I have become a statue cn'the banks 
of the river of time, and am attending the celebration of some mystery from 
whence I shall come forth old or without age. I feel as it were anonymous, 
impersonal ; my eye is fixed as in death ; my mind is vague and universal, as 
nihility or the absolute. I am in suspense ; as if non-existent. In these mo- 
ments it seems to me that my consciousness withdraws into its eternity .... 
it perceives itself even in its substance, superior to every form containing its 
past, present, and future; a vacuum that encloses everything; an invisible 
and prolific medium ; viriuality of a world divesting itself of its own existence, 
in order to lay hold of itself again in its own pure inwardness. In these sub- 
lime instants the soul has re-entered into itself ; and having returned to the 
state of indetermination it is reabsorbed beyond the bounds of its own life, 
it becomes again a divine embryo. Everything is effaced, dissolved, distend- 
ed ; changed into its primitive state, re-immersed in the original fluidity, 
without shape, angles, or definite design. This state is contemplation and 
not stupor ; it is neither painful, nor joyous, nor sad ; it is without all special 
sentiment and beyond all finished thought. It is the consciousness of being, 
and the consciousness of the latent omnipossibility at the base of this being. 
Such is the sensation of the spiritual infinite." (Amiel, Journa.1 intiine, 1856. 1 

To sum up : The states of consciousness that are 
called ideas, are only a secondary factor in the consti- 
tution and changes of personality. The idea certainly 
plays a part, but not a preponderating one. These 
results agree with what psychology has long since 
taught, namely, that ideas have an objective charac- 
ter. Hence it follows, that they cannot express the 
individual in the same proportion as his desires, sen- 
timents, and passions. 


E^ifffsa repens. (Close to the ground.) 

The Epigcea repens must have been the first flower 
of Spring to greet the Plymouth pilgrims in the month 
of April after their winter on the bleak Massachusetts 

It was called by them, and has ever since been 
called by their descendants, the Mayflower, in honor 
of the vessel that brought them over, and in lender 
recollection of the flowers of May in the old country. 
Yet it cannot claim full possession of this name, 
which is given to so many other flowers in different 

By what chance it has come, in many places, to be 
called Trailing Arbutus, I know not, for although both 
plants belong to the Sub-order of Ericineae, or the 
proper Heath family, yet this plant belongs not to the 
tribe Arbuteae, but to Andromedeas, (see Gray's 
Manual,) and the characters and expressions of the 
two species are very different, while its own botan- 
ical name Epigaea beautifully describes its constant 
habit of clinging closely to the ground. 

My heart always thrills with pain when I hear it 
called arbutus, and my inward protest has taken 
shape in the following verses. 

We may not call our flower that dear ship's name, 
Which brought the sacred pilgrims to our shore. 
Since others may that honor fairly claim, 
Which add their beauty to the spring's rich store, 
While our sweet blossom comes forestalling May 
And hastening summer on her tardy way. 

What heart-thrills woke among that pilgrim band, 

When first by fragrant breath its home they found. 
And for its welcome to their chosen land 

They blessed the plant that closely "hugs the ground." 
For Epigaea is its rightful name 
By which it may the heather's kindred claim. 

Arbutus is its cousin ; loftier bred, 
It rises oft a fair and stately tree 
Where Caucasus uprears its cloud-capped head, 
Or California grants it nurture free. 

Give to the noble tree its rightful dower. 
But not its name unto our pilgrim flower. 

A modest blossom, it still " hugs the ground " 
Though Commonwealths have risen on its soil, 

Still in the solemn pine woods is it found, 
To bless the children of the sons of toil ; 



By mount or sea it ever is the same, 
For Epigsea is its rightful name. 

In autumn budded, braving winter's snows. 

Which turn to sweetness in its sheltering heart. 
The chilliest wind New England's spring time knows, 
Blights not the blossom with its icy dart. 
But opening to'the sun's first warming ray. 
It brings the promise of thetiarvest day. 

O Mayflower true, thou heralded the May, 

And breathed God's message to that pilgrim band, 
" Look hearts no more beyond the sheltering bay, 
" Your home is here and this your chosen land, 
" Cling tight like me, God's blessings still abound 
" In humble hearts, that ever hug the ground." 

Let kingly Laurel crown lu,xuriant June, 

The Rose and Lily gladden Summer's day. 
Aster and Golden Rod the harvest moon 
And gold Chrysanthemum Thanksgiving day. 
In wayward April most of all renowned 
Is Epigaea close unto the ground. , 

Cling close true hearts, unto our pilgrim land. 

Though venturous feet may tread the spreading West, 
And when amid its lofty pines you stand. 

There still you find the flower that loves them best. 
Bend low and breathe its fragrance spread around. 
And Epigaea bless that ever hugs the ground. 

E. D. C. 


Did you ever read that amusing chapter in Ivanhoe which de- 
scribes the meeting between Friar Tuck and the disguised King 
Richard at the friar's hermitage in the forest where the king had 
lost his way ? It is worth reading, especially in Lent. The king 
having, not without some difficulty, obtained shelter for the night 
in the friar's hut, is offered parched peas and cold water for sup- 
per, the anchorite assuring him that he had nothing better in the 
hermitage, and that he himself was limited to such food by the 
rules of his order and the vow that he had made. The fat and 
rosy appearance of the friar made the king suspicious, and after a 
a good deal of mutual banter, the hermit was compelled to pro- 
duce from a secret cupboard a savory venison pie, and several 
quarts of wine, on which he and his guest made merry. There is 
refined satire in the story, but the jovial good nature of the her- 
mit, and his courageous violation of the oppressive game laws, re- 
deem the impudent hypocrisy which prompted him to take the 
monastic vows and adopt the garb of austerity that he might grat- 
ify more easily his taste for luxury and his passion for self-indul- 
gence. The moral of the storj' is obvious, and the application of 
it might be made useful now. Society assumes the forms of lent 
as Tuck assumed his cowl, to spiritualise venison pie, and make 
piety a pleasure. 

There is one keen detective among us who is not to be de- 
ceived by the odor of sanctity, nor by metaphysical sackcloth and 
ashes. The name of him is " Business." He knows the etiquette 
of lent ; and the ceremonial sham of it helps him to sell his mer- 
chandise. How this mockery of the lenten fast grins at us from 
the shops where dainty eatables are sold, and where upon the walls 
and windows we may see this ironical advertisement, "Lenten 
Delicacies." It is easy enough to observe the forms of the holy 
season, while we cheat the spirit of it by wearing sackcloth made 
of silk, and fasting thrice a day on "lenten delicacies," artistically 
cooked and seasoned, so that the fast may be a feast. The palate 
of the epicure tingles with anticipated gustation, as he reads in 

the newspapers ingenious recipes for cooking luxurious lenten 
food, dishes delightful to the appetite of Apicius, bills of fare that 
represent the contradiction and the travesty of lent, the counter- 
feit imitation and caricature of the forty days fast in the wilder- 
ness. The gospel, according to the four hundred, patronises lent 
by an economy of balls and parties, but makes it a religious ex- 
cuse for a change of luxuries, that stimulate pleasure by variety. 
This false pretense of keeping lent while evading all its obligations, 
like other affectations of religion, gradually eliminates truth from 
the character, and makes insincerity a habit and a fashion. 

'A- «■ 

Not in the formalism of religion only, do we see the respecta- 
bility of cant and dissimulation but pharisaism overflows the 
churches and saturates both politics and business. It is becoming 
an axiom in all of them that duplicity is essential to success. The 
famous game of euchre in which the heathen Chinee concealed 
more aees and bowers than Bill Nye and Truthful James, has re- 
cently been imitated in a three-cornered game played in the United 
States Senate by Senators Plumb, Edmunds, and Morrill. In 
this interesting affair each of the contestants proved himself to be 
proficient in "ways that are dark and in tricks that are vain." 
Mr. Plumb having lost the game, brought the matter before the 
Senate, and complained that having stacked the cards for his own 
purposes, he had been caught with guile, and actually outwitted 
and outswindled by the other two. He sorrowfully said that when 
the McKinley bill was before the senate he had voted to sweeten 
it a little by a clause giving to the people of Vermont a bounty of 
two cents a pound on all the maple sugar they could make ; but he 
had done this "with intent to deceive" — the legislature of Vermont. 
He had voted thus against his conscience to help Senator Morrill, 
who was then a candidate before the Vermont legislature for an- 
other term in the senate ; but it was distinctly understood and 
agreed between the parties that after Mr. Morrill had made his 
calling and election sure, the bounty on maple sugar was to be 
stricken from the bill by the conference committee ; instead of 
which, Mr. Morrill having been elected, and the bill being in con- 
ference. Senator Edmunds broke the' agreement and actually 
wrote a letter saying that if the bounty on maple sugar were 
stricken out he would vote against the bill. So, as the vote of the 
Vermont senators could not be spared, additional saccharine was 
given to Vermont sap by a bounty of two cents a pound for all the 
sugar it might yield. No complaint would have been made, were 
it not that when Mr. Plumb attempted to get some bounty for the 
sorghum sugar of Kansas, Mr. Morrill opposed it, " Hence those 


Last Sunday, the pastor of the largest Baptist congregratioa 
in Chicago, preached on the subject of a personal devil, and 
proved, to his own satisfaction at least, and probably to the satis- 
faction of his hearers, that Satan is a real character with hoofs 
and horns, going about like a rearing lion seeking whom he may 
devour. The learned preacher, a Doctor of Divinity, having spe- 
cial knowlidgeof the subject, refuted the modern heresy that Satan 
is a myth, a mere name for the principle of evil, the ideal repre- 
sentative of darkness and of lies. He declared him to be an in- 
telligent personality, whose envious ambition it is to defeat ihe 
plan of salvation by seducing human souls into his own service, 
and to their own perdition. The origin, the mission, the at- 
tributes, and prerogatives of the devil, are matters of controversy 
among Doctors of Divinity, and because of their confusion of 
opinion, some persons would abolish him altogether by denying 
his existence. The evidence that he is here amongst us is too strong 
to be resisted, and therefore it is better to acknowledge him and 
convert him. This is a holier work for Doctors of Divinity than 
scolding him. The sermon above referred to, being under discus- 
sion in a Baptist family, a young lady who is a member of the 



church in good standing, was asked the pointed question, "Do you 
believe in a personal devil ?" She answered, "O dear, yes: I 
know several right here in Chicago." She spoke better than she 
knew. The devil "Want," for instance, is the parent of a good 
many personal devils, and by abolishing him we shall easily con- 
vert them. There is hope even for Satan ; and his conversion is 
not outside the plan of salvation. 

A strange blending of Christianity and Paganism was exhibited 
a few days ago, when the Queen of England baptised a ship of 
war with wine ; and with ceremonial words that sounded like in- 
cantations launched this iron corsair upon the sea, bidding it go 
forth on its malevolent mission of devastation and death. How 
thin must be the bit of civilised veneering that covers our native 
savageness, when even in England, whose missionaries with fanat- 
ical courage carry the bible everywhere, and preach its gospel to 
benighted souls from Greenland's icy mountains to India's coral 
strand, it is thought consistent and congenial that such a swagger- 
ing buccaneer should be commissioned by a woman, a venerable 
and virtuous lady seventy-two years old ! With lofty phrase, and 
form that resemble the baptismal service in the prayer-book she 
named this ugly rover after her own son, the christening being 
done in pagan fashion by wine sprinkled on the forehead of the 
ship, henceforward to be known in mischief as the "Royal Ar- 
thur." But the performance was not Pagan altogether, because 
right there, by the very side of the Queen, aiding, assisting, and 
abetting the act of consecration, was a minister of the Christian 
gospel, offering prayer, giving grace and benediction to the sea 
monster, and invoking theological potency for its gunpowder and 
its guns. When the great cannon in the forts, and on the attendant 
ships in the bay, saluted the christening with diabolic thunder, 
the air became poisoned with a brimstone flavor, like atmosphere 
iftiported from the home of the condemned. 

M. M. Trumbull 



To the Editor of The Open Court : 

I DOUBT whether anyone believing strictly in the ethics of 
monogamy, nor yet his philosophical opponent of the varietist 
school will be satisfied with your leading articles on "Sexual 
Ethics." For people who are in deadly earnest about the way 
other people should live, are ill satisfied with concessions, either 
to themselves or their enemies. Therefore I suspect that instead 
of having poured oil on the troubled waters, you have rather added 
fuel to flame. While I have no particular interest in seeing the 
varietist side of the argument uppermost, I would prefer to see a 
stronger presentation of it, given from their own standpoint, than 
that allowed by the author in question. That standpoint would. 
be necessarily a theoretical one, and the same from which any 
logical free-lover {monogamic or otherwise) would look. I can 
imagine such a person saying: "But sir, your whole argument 
rests upon the recognition of a monstrous fact, viz. that woman is, 
and always has been, property, that the present basis of marriage 
' is purely an economy of man, in which child-bearing and rearing 
is the (unction of the wife, in return for which the husband pro- 
tects and supports her, as he protects and supports his horses ; 
that in the contest between several forms of sexual association, 
polygamic, polyandric, and monogamic, o// luised on this same eco- 
}ioiinc foundation, monogamy has produced the best results. Very 
well. Concerning the recognition of the fact I have no quarrel 
with the author of those articles. On the contrary, the sooner it 
is admitted the better. But a most serious debate arises when he 
endeavors to perpetuate this ideal of property in women. 

He who faces the east, knows that two great factors in econo- 
mic evolution, apparently warring, but really in harmony with each 
other, the socialisation of industry and the equalisation of liberty, 
are rapidly transforming all human relations. This word human 
mcludes woman. The equalisation of liberty means the deathblow 
to property in wives, and the socialisation of industry means the 
possibility of bread-and-butter independence, that is the guarantee 
of equality. What then ? The rearing of children, the constant, 
destructive sacrifice of woman's self-hood, necessitated by our 
much lauded family-life, will cease to constitute the tota/e of her 
existence. ' Higher than being a mother (any animal may be that), 
she will be first a human being. Now, the question between va- 
riety and single affection may indeed begin to be settled. But no 
argument which will apply to justify the monogamy of the present, 
can have any weight for or against a system of marriage whose 
basis must be that of a contract between equals for love's sake, not 
the transfer of a piece of property from a father to a husband. 

Like the dissolving colors of a bubble, the old economy of so- 
ciety is changing, melting, going before our eyes. Are we then 
justified in holding up an ideal to the future, which was born in 
the barbarisms of the past. Do you not thus contend in support- 
ing the wife-slavery of the individual family, by reasons necessa- 
rily drawing their strength from a dying system ? - 

How much farther this might develop I leave to the enthusi- 
astic varietist. For I myself believe strongly in laissez-faire in 
morals as in economy and am not over-concerned about the tri- 
umph of either system, contending only for unlimited competition 
between the conflicting theories : that is what I understand hy free 

Enterprise, Kansas. V. de Cleyre. 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 


roughs 2739 


PERSONALITY. Th. Ribot .' 2742 


The Mayflower. Ednah D. Cheney 2744 

CURRENT TOPICS. Insincerity in Religion and Politics. 

Gen. M. M. Trumbull 2745 


Abolish Woman Slavery. V. de Cleyre 2746 



The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion ^Arith Science. 

No. 187. (Vol. v.— 5.) 

CHICAGO, MARCH 26, 1891. 


One of the most important and at the same time 
noblest of our present ideals is the emancipation of 
woman. Woman is the weaker sex, because nature 
has destined her strength to be sacrificed for the per- 
petuation of the race. Woman represents the future 
of humanity ; the immortality of mankind is entrusted 
to her. The burdens of life are upon the whole so di- 
vided that man must struggle with the adversities of 
conditions, while woman must suffer all the throes 
and woes which are the price of the continuance of 
human existence. He is the more active fighter, the 
worker, the hero; she is the passive endurer, the toiler, 
the martyr. He has imder thes'e conditions grown 
strong, physically and intellectually ; she has grown 
noble. The activity of each being shapes its organ- 
ism and models its character. Thus the virtues of 
man became daring courage, concentration of thought, 
and enterprising energy ; the virtues of woman be- 
came abnegation of self, patience, and purity of 

Woman, being the weaker sex, has been and to a 
great extent is still held in subjection to the power 
and jurisdiction of the stronger sex. It is true that 
among cultured people the' rudeness of this relation, 
has disappeared. The husband has ceased to be the 
tyrant of the household. He respects the indepen- 
dence of his wife and prefers to have in her a loving 
comrade rather than a pliant slave. Nevertheless 
progress is slow. It is perhaps not so much oppres- 
sion by single persons as by traditional habits that is 
still weighing heavily upon woman, retarding the final 
emancipation of her sex. 

Prof. E. D. Cope has written an article on the 
economical relation between the sexes* in which he 
emphasises woman's dependence on the support and 
protection of man. Professor Cope explains satisfac- 
torily the present state of society, but he leaves out of 
sight the question whether this present state has to 
continue forever. His article is a scholarly investiga- 
tion of existent conditions, but he does not touch the 
problem whether this is the only possible natural state 
or a special phase in the development of human sex- 
relations. We believe that the present phase is to be 

* The Monist, No. I, p. 3^. 

followed by another phase securing to woman abetter, 
nobler, and "more dignified position. 

It maybe conceded, as a matter of historical state- 
ment, that in the struggle for life women had to de- 
pend upon men for protection and sustenance. Yet it 
must not be forgotten that men in their turn also had 
to depend upon women. What are men without 
mothers and wives? How helpless is an old widower, 
and in spite of his so-called lib.erty how poor is the 
life of an old bachelor. 

Professor Cope does not overlook this point, -j'et 
he maintains that women as a rule cannot make a liv- 
ing ; he maintains that whenever they do, it is an ex- 
ception and this is the reason why they must look 
for sustenance and protection from the stronger sex. 
Granted that this has been so ; also granted that many 
women had to marry for this sole reason, must we 
therefore conclude that this wretched state of things 
is to continue forever? It may be true that there was 
a time when serfdom was an unavoidable state for a 
certain class of people who in a state of liberty would 
not make a decent living for themselves; slavery per- 
haps was a greater blessing to them than to their mas- 
ters. Would that be a reason for continuing slavery 
in a higher state of social conditions? 

The woman question has originated through the 
very progress of civilisation. In order to make a liv- 
ing a human being has no longer to depend upon 
physical strength, but mostly upon mental capacities, 
nay, more so upon moral qualities. Sense of duty is 
more important than muscle power, and sometimes 
even than skill. The time has come that at least in 
many branches a well educated woman can do the 
same work as a man, and she is no more dependent 
upon man for sustenance and protection. 

This fact will not alter the natural relation of sex. 
Our women will not cease to marr}', to bear and to 
raise children. Yet it will alter their position in this 
relation. They will no longer marrj' for the mere sake 
of protection, but for love alone. They will then enter 
marriage on equal terms; and thus they will obtain a 
more dignified place in human society. 

It cannot be denied that woman is different from 
man. The average man is superior in some respects, 
and the average woman is superior in other respects. 
Neither man nor woman is the perfect man. True 



humanity is not represented by either. True humanity 
consists in their union, and in the consequences of their 
union, namely in the family. 

Woman's emancipation does not involve any de- 
traction from man's rights or duties. Man will not 
suffer from it, on the contrary, he will profit. It will 
raise our family life upon a higher stage and man will 
be as much a gainer in this bargain as the slave-holder 
who can employ free labor easier and cheaper than 
keep slaves. As no one would wish to re-establish 
slavery now, so in a later period no man' would ever 
care to have the old state recalled when women mar- 
ried mainly for the sake of sustenance and protection. 

Let me add that woman emancipation is slowly 
but assuredly accomplished, not by acts of legislature, 
but by a natural growth which no conservatism can 
stop. Acts of legislature giving more liberty and 
chances of making a living to woman, will not be the 
cause, they will come in consequence of a true woman 
emancipation. There are many steps taken in a wrong 
direction. Efforts are wasted especially by some over- 
enthusiastic women in making women like men, in- 
stead of making men and women equal. These erro- 
neous aspirations are injurious to the cause, yet after 
all they cannot ruin it. There is an ideal of a higher, 
more elevated and a better womanhood, and this ideal 
(although it is often misunderstood) will be accom- 
plished without the destruction of the womanly in 
woman. p. c. 



The editorial notice of my article in No. i of The 
Monist on the "Material Relations of Sex in Human 
Society," requires the following remarks by way of fur- 
ther elucidation of the subject. It is evident that 
some men and women in common with the editor of 
The Monist, entertain the idea that an important 
change in the economical relations of the sexes is to 
occur, and that such change will be beneficial. They 
even use the term "slavery" in connection with the 
present general dependent relation of women to men. 
No doubt many men would be glad to have their wives 
support themselves, and even to support the entire 
family, but the aspirations of such men do not com- 
mand our respect, unless their situation renders such 
assistance absolutely necessary. It is probable that the 
term "slavery" would be quite as appropriate to this 
state of affairs for women, as to its opposite. That 
women may and do often render important aid to the 
finances of a family, is right and proper, but it rarely 
extends to entire self-support and cannot be looked 
upon as evidence that women generally can be finan- 
cially independent of men. The disabilities of mar- 
ried women are self-evident, and require no further 

elucidation; every one is familiar with them and their 
effects in both domestic and business relations. The 
nature of the competition between men and women is 
well described in an editorial in the Women's Tribune, 
which commenting adversely on my article, affords 
unconsciously excellent support to my position. It 
says: "No men refrains from distancing a woman, 
whether it is in the race for a street car or a post office. 
In every sense of the word he is her competitor and 
antagonist in the industrial world. He only asks equal 
wages for her, when for her to be paid otherwise would 
make her a dangerous rival. This is not saying that 
many men are not just and chivalrous to women, but it is 
expressing the actual state of affairs as it exists to- 
day." As this is exactly the treatment which man 
gives his fellow-man in the working world, it is what 
woman has to expect so soon as she enters the field 
as his "competitor and antagonist." She cannot ex- 
pect fairly anything else. The industrial pursuits of 
men have for their object in large part the support of 
a wife and children. And as between the woman who 
is not his wife, and the woman who is his wife, he 
will regard the latter before the former. 

In the natural, i. e. matrimonial, relation between 
men and women, all this is changed. The man waits 
for the woman at the " horse car," "post office," etc., 
aids her to gain her desires, and gives her the first of 
everything. She is freer than the man, who is the 
" slave " to the economic and business relations of the 
time and place in which he lives. The supposition 
that man is " free " in business relations, is untrue ; 
he is hedged about and under restraint in all direc- 
tions. He is under the domination of the strongest 
muscle or brain, and the law of the extinction of the 
unfit, the reverse of the "survival of the fittest" has 
him in its iron grasp. That women should desire to 
enter this life in exchange for the comparatively mild 
restraints of the matrimonial relation is inconceivable, 
and is only to be explained on the supposition that 
they are ignorant of the facts. And to succeed in a 
matrimonial carreer it is only necessary to observe the 
principal conditions necessary to a man to success in 
business — personal civility and honesty. 



In July 1880 I went down from Berlin to Leipsic 
to attend the banquet given in honor of the Fourth by 
the United States Consul. I happened to stop at the 
same hotel where Dr. Schliemann and his family were 
staying, while he was busily engaged correcting the 
proofs of the book described in the following letter. I 
sat opposite him at table and conversed with him a 
great deal. Shortly afterwards he came up to Berlin, 
as will also be seen in one of the letters given below. 



where I again met him. At Leipsic I also saw some- 
thing of his wife and children. From this acquaintance 
sprang a correspondence. Looking over his letters 
the other day I found a few which seem to me to be 
of enough interest to make public, and I therefore lay 
them before your readers. 

While at work correcting proofs, as already stated. 
Dr. Schliemann wrote me as follows from Leipsic, 
under date of July 12th, 1880, concerning his forth- 
coming volume : 

"The new book, 'Ilios,' has not the form of a 
journal ; it is altogether a scientific work and the his- 
torical part of the excavations is, therefore, out of 
place in the text. But as it is of great interest, I have 
joined it to m}^ autobiography with which I begin the 
book. I can assure you, however, that if I commence 
the book with the history of my life, it is not from 
any feeling of vanity, but from a desire to show how 
the work of my later life has been prompted by, and 
has been the natural consequence of, the impressions 
I received in my earliest childhood, and that, so to 
say, the pickaxe and spade for the excavation of Troy 
and the Royal sepiilakras of Mycens were both forged 
and sharpened in the little village in Mecklenburg in 
which I passed eight years of my earliest childhood. 
I also found it necessary to relate how I obtained the 
means which enabled me, in the autumn of my life, 
to realise the gigantic projects I formed when I was a 
poor little boy. But 1 flatter myself that the manner 
in which I have employed my time, and the use 1 have 
made of wealth, will meet with universal approbation, 
and that my autobiography may aid in diffusing among 
the intelligent public of all countries a taste for the 
high and noble studies which have sustained my cour- 
age during the hard trials of my life, and which promise 
to sweeten the days yet left me to- live. 

" I have availed myself of the opportunity to dwell 
at some length on the erroneous method by which 
Greek is taught in America and England. In fact I 
think it a cruel injustice to inflict for eight years on 
an unhappy pupil a language of which, when he leaves 
college, as a general rule, he knows hardly more than 
when he first began to learn it. As causes of this 
miserable result I accuse, in the first place, the arbi- 
trary and atrocious pronunciation of Greek usual in 
America and England ; and, in the second place, the 
erroneous method employed, according to which the 
pupils learn to disregard the accents entirelj' and to 
consider them as mere impediments, whereas the ac- 
cents constitute a most important auxiliary in learning 
the language. 

"What a happ3' effect could be produced on gen- 
eral education and what an enormous stimulus could 
be given to scientific pursuits, if intelligent youths 
could obtain in eighteen months not only a thorough 

knowledge of modern Greek, but also a thorough 
knowledge of the most divine and most sonorous lan- 
guage which was spoken by Homer and Plato, and 
could learn the latter tongue as a living language so 
as never to forget it. And how easily, at how small an 
expense, could the change be made. A detailed ac- 
count of the method I recommend, you find in my 
book. The idea was given to me by the examinations 
in the Merchant Tailor's College in London, to which 
I was invited. There were speeches in English, Ger- 
man, French, Latin, and Greek. All the speeches I 
understood, exdept those in Greek, nay, I did not un- 
derstand a single word of them. I preach no idle 
theories, but stubborn facts, and ought, therefore, to 
be listened to." 

Dr. Schliemann then goes on to give a resume of 
the contents of his then forthcoming volume. As it 
concerns a most important archaeological work, as it 
contains many curious facts, and as it comes from the 
author himself, I venture to give it in full, as follows : 

"The order of my 'Ilios' is this: (i) My autobio- 
graphy, containing a full description, as just men- 
tioned, of the method by which any intelligent boy 
can master in eighteen months the difficulties of both 
modern and ancient Greek, learn both as living lan- 
guages, understand all classics, and write with fluency 
dissertations in ancient Greek on any subject he is 
acquainted with ; further the history of my excava- 
tions at Troy and Ithaca. (2) A full description of 
the country of the Trojans, its mountains, promon- 
tories, rivers, valleys, its geology, botany, zoology, 
history, as well as its all-important ethnology and lin- 
guistics. (3) Criticism of all ancient and modern 
literature on Troy. (4) The first city of Troy, the 
ruins of which are on the rock Hissarlik at a depth of 
from forty-five to fifty three feet below the surface. 
('5) The second city. Bronze was in both cities still 
unknown, but gold, silver, and copper, were known. 
In both cities were found five axes of jade (nephrite), 
which prove that the inhabitants had immigrated from 
the highlands of Asia. (6) The third or the burnt 
city, in which ten treasures were found. Here bronze 
as well as the art of soldering were known. The geol- 
ogy of the strata of debris of this most remarkable 
burnt city, as well as those of the two preceding and 
all the following cities, is minutely described by my 
excellent collaborator Prof. Rudolf Virchow, of Berlin, 
Emile Burwouf of Paris, and myself. Here were found 
five jade axes, and three more in the two following 
cities. (7) The fourth city. (8) The fifth city, which, 
as well as the four preceding cities, are prehistoric 
settlements, (g) The fifth is followed up in the sixth 
city by a Lydian settlement, all the pottery show- 
ing the very greatest resemblance to the most ancient 
pottery found in the terra mare between the trans- 



Paduan district and the Abruzzi in Italy. (lo) The 
seventh city, the Ilion of the yEolic colony, (ii) The 
heroic tumuli of the Troad, of which I explored six. 

"The book is illustrated among other things by 
about 2,000 different characteristic types of objects 
discovered in the seven cities. For the most part the 
Trojan antiquities are unique, but whenever there are 
analoga in other museums, these aualoga are always 
carefully pointed out. All my arguments in the book 
are supported by quotations from ancient classics, and 
of such quotations there are, I think, more than five 
thousand in foot-notes, which greatly embellish the 

" If at present not all philologists believe that I dis- 
covered Troy in the third, the burnt city, on my death 
this discovery will be universally acknowledged, and, 
there being no second Troy to excavate, I venture to 
hope that my present work, which is the result of long 
years' hard labor, will be appreciated and will be con- 
sidered for all coming ages very useful for reference." 

When Dr. Schliemann died, surprise was expressed, 
even by some Americans, that the will of the great ex- 
plorer revealed the fact that he was an American citi- 
zen. In my conversations with him he always referred 
to himself as an American, and his "we" and "us" 
always meant " we Americans " or " us Americans. " 
The closing passage of the letter from which I have 
been quoting, and passages in other letters which will 
follow, show that Dr. Schliemann's American citizen- 
ship had, at least at this time, a strong hold on him. 
The letter closes with this paragraph : 

" You asked me when I am going over to America. 
If this depended upon me, I would go over instantly 
and would never leave again the great country. [The 
words are so written in the original.] But my days 
are counted and my minutes are precious. Besides, 
in America I cannot be of any use to science, whereas 
I may still be of great use to it by continuing my ex- 
plorations in the Orient, where Sardis, in Asia Minor, 
Lycosara in Arcadia and Orchomenos in Bceotia, im- 
patiently await their delivery by my pickaxe and spade. 
My fellow citizens are by far too intelligent not to un- 
derstand all this, and I feel sure that they would ap- 
plaud and hail with far greater enthusiasm any new, 
great archaeological discovery I might make, than any 
lectures I could deliver to them personally on my old 
discoveries. Pray present my kindest regards to Dr. 
White. [Hon. Andrew D. White, then United States 
Minister to Germany.]" 

In a brief note written on the same day as the fore- 
going letter, Dr. Schliemann said : 

"I just learn from Professor Virchow that he has 
secured me the place of honor for the opening day of 
the Anthropological Congress (August 5) and that I 
have to lecture first. He adds that he has already 

announced my name, and I see, therefore, no other 
alternative but to accept. I wrote to him to send 
tickets both to you and to our honorable minister. Dr. 

I call attention to the "our" in the last phrase of 
this letter. In another letter he says: " On my first visit 
to Berlin I shall have very great pleasure in making 
the acquaintance of the honorable Dr. White, our 
United States Minister to the German Court. But 
after all I do not know j'et whether I shall be able to 
attend in August the Anthropological Congress in 
Berlin, for the preparation of my lecture and my stay 
in Berlin would take up a whole week, whilst I have 
not a moment to spare." 

But he did go up to the German capital, did have 
the place of honor, spoke in the presence of the 
then Crown Prince and Princess by whom he was 
highly complimented and was feted in a grand way by 
all the German savants, as I saw with my own eyes 
during the sittings of the Congress. The effect of 
this changed sentiment in German}' in regard to Schlie- 
mann was very important. It evidently made Schlie- 
mann less of an Ariierican, or perhaps it would be 
more exact to say that it made him more of a German 
and secured for the Berlin Museum his valuable col- 
lections, which might otherwise have gone to the 
British Museum, or to New York. 

The following letter, written from Leipsic after his 
return there, is dated August 31st, and reveals Schlie- 
mann's joy at the recognition of his labors by his na- 
tive land. The opening passage refers to the banquet 
which closed the labors of the Anthropological Con- 

" B3' a strange accident I received only to day your 
very kind letter of the loth inst., from which I am 
sorry to see that you missed that splendid festival of 
the gth inst. at the Kaiserhof, for you would have en- 
joyed it very much indeed. 

"Mind that both in America and in England my 
discoveries were acknowledged at once and all my 
theories and conclusions were almost universally ac- 
cepted there, whilst in Germany they were subjects 
of universal laughter and derision. But now all at 
once they see in Germany that they are wrong and 
implicitly accept all my arguments. Though this ac- 
knowledgment in my native country comes late, it is 
highly agreeable to me, for I thought it would come 
only after my death. But that it would come one day, 
I was perfectly sure. 

" In fact the acknowledgement of the German 
scientific world could not have been more manifestly 
symbolised than by the tnenii of the grand dinner, 
which is twelve inches long by nine in breadth, and 
represents on the right Nordenskjold laboring hard 
on board his 'Vega' in front of a huge iceberg on 



which the manifold victuals are written in Swedish. 
Below, to the right, is pictured an Esquimaux holding 
in his hand the map of the Arctic regions, while to the 
left is the City of Berlin symbolised by a polar bear 
which holds a laurel wreath in his mouth. 

"On the left side of the beautiful card I am repre- 
sented heroically, sitting on the great treasiire sym- 
bolised by a safe with the legend ''Apviif.i npiaj^toio. 
(Arnheim is the celebrated safe maker in this country.) 
In my right hand I hold an immense spade ; on my 
left is standing the goddess Victory putting a laurel- 
crown on my head, while the City of Berlin, personi- 
fied by a bear, puts another laurel wreath at my feet. 
Above my head is represented Troy with its huge walls 
and towers, with the legend "/Azo? ipi/. In front of me 
is the list of the dishes in Greek crowned by the Lion's 
Gate of Mycenae, with the legend in Greek which 
translated reads : ' Banquet in honor of the great 
Schliemann.' Below all this are beautiful representa- 
tions from the 'Iliad,' such as Hector taking leave of 
Andromache and Astyanax frightened at the sight of 
his father's helmet-crest. 

"Who would have thought so rapid a change pos- 
sible only a few years ago, when the whole German 
press was insulting me and throwing thunderbolts at 
me? Nay they pretended even that I had got fabri- 
cated all the Trojan and Mycenian treasures at Athens 
to impose upon' the credulous ! But my collections 
have never been and never will be for sale. 

" My kindest regards to you and to our learned am- 
bassador, the Hon. Dr. White. 

" I write in the utmost hurry and beg to be excused 
for slips of the pen." 

The foregoing extracts show with what zeal Henry 
Schliemann bent to his work, reveal his strong Amer- 
ican leaning, and prove once more how necessary 
applause and appreciation is to the happiness of a man 
of genius. 

Paris, Feb., iSqi. 


Last year, when the people of Kansas elected to the office of 
judge a citizen who was not a lawyer, some surprise was mani- 
fested, and the performance was regarded as a bit of lunacy pe- 
culiar to the inhabitants of that remote and sockless province ; but 
the same eccentricity has been practiced in Chicago for many 
years without exciting comment. At this term of the appellate 
court forty-five judgments appealed from the lower courts were 
passed upon, and twenty-three of them reversed, leaving twenty- 
two affirmed, and these will very likely be reversed by the supreme 
court when they get up there. There are mechanics in Chicago, 
who for a hundred dollars or so, will make a wooden machine to 
decide law-suits, and will warrant that more of its judgments will 
be sustained by the higher courts, than of those rendered by the 
numerous judges innocent of law, who get seven thousand dollars 
a year each for deciding wrong. It has been candidly said in a 
book by one of the^ judges that the civil courts of Chicago, are 
practically closed against the poor. This is doubtless true, and 

the exclusion is one of the incidents of poverty for which the poor 
man has reason to be grateful. "The law's delay " is among Ham- 
let's provocations to suicide, but in Chicago we have doubled 
this plague of life, for we have not only the law's delay, but at 
the end of that a reversal of the judgment. Happy is the man 
who is too poor to go to law. 

* " * 
While it is not necessary in Chicago, for a judge to be a law- 
yer, it is essential that he be a partisan branded "Republican" 
or "Democrat." This is the common law of the bench; and 
every candidate for judicial honors must be duly enlisted and 
mustered into a republican or k democratic battalion. Member- 
ship in any of the other political parties is a disqualification. A 
Coke or a Blackstone, a Kent or a Story, would not be eligible to 
a judgeship in Chicago until after he had obtained his diploma as 
a republican or a democrat. There are some good lawyers in 
Chicago who do not belong to any political party, and some who 
belong to one or other of the various heterodox parties, but never 
a man of them is eligible to the bench ; and what is yet more curi- 
ous, the judgeships must be equally divided between the orthodox 
partisans. Whenever a judicial vacancy occurs by reason of death 
or other accident, it must te filled, not for the public advantage, 
but according to the politics of the last incumbent. All this is 
delightfully stupid and conservative. It has in it the elements of 
that impartiality shown by old Squire Vinton, who was a jiMice 
of the peace in the western country several years ago. There 
were only two lawyers in the town, one of them a democrat, the 
other a republican, and consequently they had one side or the 
other of every case. One day the republican had a plain and 
very easy case, but was greatly astonished when the squire gave 
judgment against him. He remonstrated fervently, and showed 
how wrong the decision was, but the squire was firm, and said : 
"Mark, you won the last case, and its Jimmy's turn to win this 
one, so jedgment goes agin you, and squashes your declaration 
like a house fell on it." By this method of equity, the partisan 
division of the judgeships may be made logical, for unless the 
democratic judges decide in favor of democrats, and the republi- 
cans the other way, of what use is this partisan rule ? The com- 
edy of it does not become visible until we learn that the object of 
the rule is to protect us from the evils of a partisan judiciary. 

Much inconvenience has been caused in genteel circles by the 
application to polite society of musty maxims to the effect that 
" all are equal before the law," that " there is only one code for 
the rich and poor alike," that " the law is no respecter of persons,' 
and much fabulous tradition of a similar kind. Those doctrines 
when put into practice have given some annoyance to patrician 
suitors who have been compelled to accept juries composed of a 
miscellaneous mixture, drawn, as the legal jargon has it, "from 
the body of the county," rather than from a gilt edged catalogue. 
A change in this respect has been made in St. Louis, and no doubt 
it will be adopted by the courts of Chicago and other cities where 
high society is found. The new system of drawing special jurors, 
as adopted by the jury commissioners of St. Louis, is briefly this : 
By paying S75.00 a man has the privilege of refusing to accept a 
jury drawn from the mixed rabble in the city directory, and may 
have his jury from the more select circle represented in Gould's 
Business Directory. The privilege is rather expensive, but we 
cannot expect to get aristocratic juries at democratic prices. After 
awhile juries will be classified into three grades according to qual- 
ity, like the pews in the church, or the seats in the theatre. They 
hanged a lord in England once for ordinary murder, but they al- 
lowed him a silken rope because he claimed the luxury as due to 
his rank. His claim was conceded, provided he would pay for the 
rope, which he did. Had he lived in this more enlightened age. 



he might by paying for it, have had a special jury to his liking, 
selected from " Gould's Business Directory." 

* * 

Like a burlesque old wizard in a comic opera, the venerable 
Isaac Bassett, Assistant Something or other of the Senate, using his 
magic wand, put back the national clock three several times on the 
4th of March, five minutes at a time, in order to lengthen the legis- 
lative day, and save the appropriation bills. At his command the 
sun went back fifteen minutes on the dial of Ahaz, and the proud 
noon retreated three times to accommodate the fifty-first congress. 
This puerile miracle is done at the close of every congress in the 
presence and with the approval of "potent, grave, and reverend" 
senators, who pretend that the term is just fifteen minutes too 
short for the work that congress has to do. A spectator looking 
on during the closing hours of congress would suppose that mad- 
ness had taken possession of both houses ; but never had madness 
more method in it, — nor more money. In the convivial tumult of 
the time conscience becomes drunken, and millions are squandered 
in appropriations not fit to be made. The president has no time 
to examine the bills he is required to sign, nor is it intended that 
he shall have any, for that might mean the saving of millions to 
the people, and the defeat of a hundred conspiracies against the 
treasury. It is the very stultification of a people that the late con- 
gress which pretended on the 4th of March, that it needed just 
fifteen minutes more, and employed a magician to get it, actually 
spent the first nine months of its term in idleness without even 
coming together ; and the present congress which began to draw 
pay on the 4th of March, will spend the first nine months of its 
term in the same way, and at the end it will pretend that it needs 
just fifteen minutes more to complete its business, and will call 
upon the same old conjurer for it. 

M. M. Trumbull. 



To the Editor of The Open Court: — 

I AM an admirer of G. H. Lewes's philosophy, yet it has long 
been a matter of surprise to me that Lewes's work should be so 
little known, and should apparently have produced such a small 
effect. For several years now I have been looking out for evi- 
dences of his influence, and I have to confess, I have not seen 
many. It is true he is often referred to and quoted by authors as 
an authority, but his doctrine is, I believe, much misunderstood. 
I find too, cccasionally, his thoughts appropriated without any ac- 
knowledgment, while I have seen him deliberately misquoted and 
misrepresented. Since I first began to read Tlie Open Court, nearly 
two years ago, I have anxiously scanned its pages for evidences of 
Lewes's influence, but though I frequently discover coincidences of 
view, I have never yet been able to make up my mind whether Dr. 
Carus has read Lewes's works or not. If he has not done so, it is only 
one more indication of the fact, that what Lewes would call the 
" General Mind" is on the eve of making an important step in ad- 
vance. Philosophic thought is spreading. Change is "in the air" 
and an advance is inevitable. 

At the present time there are three special forms or phases 
of thought — more or less allied — seeking recognition. The Mo- 
nism of T/ie Open Court, the Hylo- Idealism of Dr. Lewins, and 
the Reasoned Realism of George Henry Lewes. It is true, that 
this last — strangely enough — seems to be out of the running alto- 
gether, and the reason for this is, I think, not far to seek. Lewes 
and Herbert Spencer each appeal to the philosophic world, and 
the Transfigured Realism of Spencer has proved to be — not more 
true but more popular than Lewes's Reasoned Realism. The 
fact is, that Spencer's philosophy with its "Unknowable Per- 

sistent Force" seems admirably suited to answer as a cushion for 
such thinkers as have been compelled to relinquish their personal 
" Creator." 

Hylo- Idealism is at present too shadowy and vague to meet 
with much acceptance, and unfortunately its originator has per- 
sonally not been successful in placing his philosophy before the 
world; indeed his own exposition of it, seems tome to be little 
other than an alternate posing, first on the pedestal of Idealism 
and then on that of Materialism, and because this intellectual 
change of position is unconsciously accomplished Dr. Lewins be- 
lieves he has reconciled them ; nor can I — with all my admiration 
for Miss Constance Naden perceive that she has accomplished 
much more. The only other writer who has, just lately, been 
able to make a fair presentation of what Dr Lewins has in his 
mind is Mr. McCrie. I refer to his article in T/ie Open Court. 
But Mr. McCrie seems fully alive to the real outcome of Hylo- 
Idealism for he entitled his article " Positive Idealism." 

■With regard to the Monism of The Open Court I confess that 
notwithstanding I have read "Fundamental Problems," I am not 
yet able to say that I understand what Monism really means — 
hence I refrain from any criticism. I feel that it must be on the 
"right lines" or there could not be so many "coincidences" such 
as I have referred to. 

Somewhat oddly, — notwithstanding my enthusiastic admira- 
tion for G. H. Lewes, — on one or two matters I do not agree with 
him. The oddness is not in the fact of my difference, but in the 
fact that on the points I refer to, Lewes and Dr. Carus are at one. 
It is not on points of doctrine, but of policy ; perhaps if I quote 
the remarks from Lewes, you will better understand what I mean. 
In the first volume of his " Problems" (p. 2) he writes : 

"There is a conspicuous effort to reconcile the aims and claims of Re- 
ligion and Science— tlie two mightiest antagonists. The many and piteous 
complaints, old as Religion itself against the growing infidelity of the age 
might be disregarded were they not confirmed on all sides by evidence that 
Religion is rapidly tending to one of two issues, either towards extinction, or 
towards transformation. Some considerable thinkers regard the former alter- 
native as the probable and desirable issue. They ar^e that Religion has 
played its part in the evolution of humanity — a noble part, yet only that of a 
provisional organ which in the course of development must be displaced by a 
final organ. Other thinkers— and I follow these— consider that Religion will 
continue to regulate the evolution ; but that to do this in the coining ages, it 
must occupy a position similar to the one it occupied in the past and express 
the highest thought of the time as that thought widens with ever growing ex- 
perience Those who entertain this hope and view of Religion founded 

on Science, believe — and I share the belief — that the present antagonism will 
rapidly merge in an energetic co-operation." 

These are sentiments which I assume will be cordially agreed 
to by yourself, biit for myself, I am unable so readily to shift the 
meaning of the term Religion. I am of opinion that the word has, 
and will ever retain, connotations which will render it a mis- 
chievous thing. Possibly in America where Religion is not state- 
endowed as it is with us, and where its dogmas have not become 
so much a part and parcel of the life of the people, and actually 
the means of livelihood to so many as it is in England, there might 
be some hopes of its dogmatic features being gradually relin- 
quished, but here it must be destroyed, and for that which Lewes 
means by Religion, another name must be found. On somewhat 
similar grounds I object to the continued use of the word Soul, 
which Lewes also adheres to. 

I now want to say a word or two on the subject of Ethics and 
Ethical Culture Societies. On the first proposition for the estab- 
lishment of such a society in London, I admit I was not over en- 
thusiastic ; partly because, although it sounded very good and 
proper, I was not quite aware of the real aim, or what it was they 
hoped to reach. I soon began to perceive that it would hardly 
suit me. The objects of such societies may be useful as tempo- 
rary expedients, but it is a case of applying remedies to symptoms, 
instead of striking at the disease. I have always strongly con- 



tended that if the basis on which human conduct has hitherto 
been grounded, be taken away, it becomes absolutely essential 
that another foundation shall be prepared. If we take away Re- 
ligion (i. e. the "Will of God") as a motive for right conduct, it 
is necessary to replace it by a philosophy which shall supply a 
more rational and consistent reason. I felt bound to cease my 
connection with one of such societies, especially when I found 
that while professing non-commitment to any philosophic basis, 
there was a decided antagonism to philosophic teachers who pro- 
fessed to be seeking such a basis. I may say that I agree almost 
entirely with your " Ethical Problem" lectures. And while writ- 
ing I may say I cordially agree with your criticism of the word 
Agnosticism. It has seemed to me to be an utter absurdity to 
make a term which is simply an acknowledgment of ignorance as 
to a certain problem the title or the designation of a party — or of 
an individual. What a really good name would be I cannot pre- 
tend to say. I positively refuse to be called an Agnostic, and if 
people call me one I at once profess my preference for the title 
Atheist. I can afford to despise the opprobrium which is supposed 
to be attached to it. With regard to your own term " Monist " 
as I have already said, I don't quite see all its implications at 

In The Monisl Ernst Mach's article is excessively interesting 
to me, and it caused me considerable surprise to find that such 
notions had been "in the air" so long. I cannot agree with the 
article by Max Dessoir. However, there are many philosophic 
tastes and The Moiibt is a free platform. 

Upper Tooting, London. J. Harrison Ellis. 

[Monism has been defined and expounded in different ways. 
I use the word simply in the sense of " a unitary conception of 
the world." There are unitary conceptions of the world of different 
types; there are, especially (i) spiritualistic and (2) materialistic 
monisms, and in addition to these extremes we have various mo- 
nisms of purely speculative and even intuitive thought. Agnostic 
monism would be that view whose principle of unity is something 
unknowable. The monism defended by The Open Court is none 
of these monisms. Its idea is simpler than the principles of the 
other unitary world-conceptions. It is "positive Monism" ; posi- 
tive, because it takes its stand on the positive facts of experience, 
arranging them into a unitary system of knowledge. 

[Positive monism is not a new philosophy or a peculiar system. 
It is the common principle of all sound philosophy. A reviewer 
of The Moitisl in The Xation, criticising our definition of monism 
says : " The search for a unitary conception of the world or for a 
unitary systematisation of science would be a good definition 
of phi/osoJ>hy, and with this good old word at hand we want 
no other." Let me repeat what I said in answer to this ( The Mo- 
llis/ p. 237): Call that which we call monism or a unitary system- 
atisation of knowledge "philosophy"; we will not quarrel about 
names — diimiiwJo eomcnianius in re. We agree perfectly with our 
critic, for we also maintain that monism (at least what we consider 
monism) is philosophy ; it is the philosophy. By calling our phi- 
losophy monism we wish to emphasise the importance of the agree- 
ment of all truths in one truth, for this agreement is the sigil/iim 
veri ; it is the criterion of truth. 

[The recognition of this agreement is a very fertile and impor- 
tant idea ; it cannot be underrated. It destroys the supernatural 
and shows that dualism in any form is untenable. The entire cos- 
mos is one indivisible whole. There is no duality of God and 
world, or of soul and world, or of spirit and matter. The soul is 
a part of the world ; God is a special aspect of the cosmos, its laws 
being considered as the ultimate authority of moral conduct, as 
the basis of ethics ; and spirit and matter are two abstracts repre- 
senting different features of one and the same reality. 

[Concerning G. H. Lewes, I have to state that — with the ex- 

ception of Goethe's life — I am only superficially familiar with his 
works. Some years ago I read in his "Problems of Life and 
Mind" the chapters pertaining to causality, but did not find in 
that respect much agreement. In The Index of 1S86, No. 37, N. S. , 
I published an article on the subject stating my differences. The 
-passage quoted by Mr. Ellis shows a strange coincidence with the 
object of The Open Court, which is " the conciliation of Religion 
with Science." (I take occasion to state here that this expression 
was formulated by Mr. Hegeler, who has read, if anything, even 
less of Mr. Lewes than I ) This, however, does not make the 
coincidence appear strange to me; since I myself can see that 
everywhere the effort of reconciling the aims and claims of Reli- 
gion and Science are conspicuous, not only in America, but also 
in orthodox England. I need but refer to such names as Matthew 
Arnold and Seeley. The scientist may not be satisfied with their 
reconciliations ; none the less there is the effort of accomplishing 
it. When I saw Professor Haeckel, he said among other things, 
that if his energies were not so completely taken up with his scien- 
tific work, he would gladly devote his life to elaborating and 
preaching the Religion of Science. Professor Haeckel is the son 
of earnest Christian parents, and he has preserved a truly religious 
spirit in the abandonment of dogmas no less than in the preserva- 
tion of his faith in truth. 

[Since I received Mr. Ellis's letter I have thought it advisable 
to place the works of Lewes in my library. I glanced over some 
of the volumes of "Problems of Life and Mind" and found many 
similarities, although even where I fully agree with Lewes, I should 
have expressed myself differently. They are also to me a proof that 
human thought " is on the verge of making an important step in 
advance." I will confess here that I have been much more struck 
by the similarities of my own convictions with W. K. Clifford s 
views. When I had settled several problems to my own satisfac- 
tion, I was not as yet familiar with Professor Clifford's solutions. 
I read his essays on "Cosmic Emotion" and on "The Nature of 
Things in Themselves" with an unusual delight. I could not ac- 
cept Clifford's presentation in toto, but there were striking agree- 
ments. My article "Feeling as a Physiological Process" was 
written as it now stands, but I re-wrote the article " Feeling and 
Motion," adopting the expression "the elements of feeling " from 
Clifford. That in spite of important similarities there are also im- 
portant differences, is a matter of course and has been pointed out 
in my article "Feeling and Motion." 

[Concerning the name "atheist," I confess that it is more de- 
finite than "agnostic." But is it not also a mere negation of theism ? 
Does it not also lack the positive element which makes a name 
valuable ? If a new word is needed, I should suggest in the place 
of atheism the term "cosmism," as expressive of the belief in a 
cosmos, that is an impersonal non-theistic universe, the laws of 
which are explained as dependent upon its intrinsic and immanent 
order, p. c] 


Northern Studies. By Edmund Gosse. Londcn : Walter Scott. 
This is a plainly but very tastefully gotten up book of 268 
pages issued in the Camelot Series. This excellent series is edited 
by Mr. Ernest Rhys, and offers at the remarkably low price of 
one shilling (in America forty cents), a large number of select 
classical productions, which " aim ratfcer at providing companions 
for street and field than scholars' texts." The present work is a 
reprint, with additions, of apart of the "Studies in the Litera- 
ture of Northern Europe "; and at the present time when so much 
interest is taken in Ibsen and other fellow-authors of his it is pe- 
culiarly welcome. "If." says the editor, "only the pages that 
"follow helped us to refer such a striking figure as Ibsen to his 
"national antecedents, and to relate him (a la J/. Taine) to 'the 
"race, the w///tvi', and the moment,' their addition to the docu 



" ments of European literary interest would be notable. But they 
"do this, not only for Ibsen, but for other and different figures — 
"so different as Bjornson and Bodtcher, Runeberg, and our be- 
" loved Hans Andersen, and offer again suggestions of curious in- 
" terest, for the dramatic critic in their account of the happily 
"conditioned National Theatre of Denmark." Mr. Gosse's book 
treats of (i) Norway, (2) Sweden, (3) Denmark ; and is divided 
into the divisions "Norwegian Poetry since 1814," " Henrik 
Ibsen," "The Lofoden Islands," "Runeberg," "The Danish Na- 
tional Theatre," "From Danish Poets," and an "Appendix" 
with poems in the originals. These essays are delightful reading 
and the editor is to be congratulated in his having been able to 
put them before the public in so attractive and cheap a form. /(/./h.. 

Methods of Teaching Patriotism. By Col. Geo. T. Bahk. New 

York : D. Van Nostrand Company. 

Col. Balch's method of teaching patriotism, or "emotional 
patriotism " as he calls it, is as follows : The material symbols of 
the nation, its flags, its seals, its coats of arms, etc., are, as the in- 
carnation of the national spirit and achievement^ to be brought by 
exercises into daily contact with the thought and conduct of our 
children ; each school is to have a flag to be presented to that 
class which attains the highest standard of punctuality and ex- 
cellence, and every morning the flag and its guard are to parade 
before the school, and the school are to salute the flag ; medals 
are to be struck with the national coat of arms, the national flag, 
etc., on their face, and to be granted to scholars as rewards for 
good conduct ; and various other ritualistic practices are to be in- 
troduced. The children of the nation are thus to be enrolled in a 
grand American Legion of Honor, a miniature G. A. R. 

A certain amount of this sort of thing, say a few times a year, 
on ffite occasions might, we think, have a beneficial effect ; but to 
have it every day, as Col. Balch proposes, for eight or nine years, 
the term of our public-school courses, would degenerate into the 
silliest chauvinism in the case of constitutions that could stand it 
that long, and into aversion and a welcome taedium vitae academ- 
cae in the case of the more sensitively organised. This is true 
fetichism — so much of it. We think much more highly of the plan 
adopted in some of our schools, of devoting the afternoons of Fri- 
day to national studies and patriotic literary exercises. This is 
better than waving flags and blowing trumpets. To know " The 
Ride of Paul Revere " or "Old Ironsides" by heart, to have read 
the " Spy" or the " The Pilot" will instil more patriotism in the 
hearts of children than years of saluting flags and wearing flag- 
emblazoned medals. 

But why "teach" patriotism at all? Has patriotism ever 
been " taught " among the nations and in the epochs that have ex- 
hibited this virtue in the grandest forms and on the grandest oc- 
casions ? One would think that patriotism were a hot-house 
plant that would thrive by the careful cultivation of gardeners and 
the sprinkling of water-pots, and not a sturdy oak that has its roots 
in a nation's soil and is nourished by storms and blasts. If we wish 
to preserve this oak we must cultivate the soil from which it 
grew, — the mind of the nation, — and not the acorns that it bears ; 
for often in national as in natural life they are hollow. Enthusi- 
asm for the past is praiseworthy and noble ; but it should never 
sentimentally take the place of preparation for the future. The 
thought precedes the deed. Homer, not Miltiades. won at Mar- 
athon ; the English Bible, not Cromwell, at Marston Moor ; Lu- 
ther, Lessing, Kant, and not Von Moltke, at Sadowa and Sedan. 
Our greatest care should be that the nation and its children should 
produce and learn to appreciate what is great, both in word and 
deed ; and the love of it, — patriotism, — will surely follow. Men 
never refuse to fight for treasures, — especially of the higher kind 
which, as the Bible says, "neither moth nor rust doth corrupt." 


Prof. Max Miiller says in one of his Gifford lectures : "How 
the peculiar character of a language may influence even religious 
expressions, I had occasion to notice in an intercourse with a young 
Mohawk. 'In Mohawk,' he said, 'we cannot say father, mother, 
child, nor the father, the mother, the child. We must always say 
my father, or thy mother, or his child.' Once when I asked him 
to translate the Apostles' Creed for me, he translated, ' I believe in 
our God, our Father, and his Son.' But when he came to the Holy 
Ghost, he asked, 'Is it iheir or his Holy Ghost.' I told him that 
there was a difference of opinion on that point between two great 
divisions of the Christian church, and he then shook his head and 
declared that he could not translate the creed until that point had 
been settled." 

"When our thoughts are found to be so dependent upon the 
habits of our language," Prof. Max Miiller adds, "shall we not 
allow a greater freedom in the interpretation of the letter ? " 





By Dr. Paul Carus. 

. 480 Pages, writh 152 Illustrative Cuts and Diagrams. PRICE $3.00. 
Printed on Extra-fine Paper, Handsomely Bound in Clolh. 


169-175 La Salle Street, Chicago, Illinois. 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

THE OE'Eirr CO'Cri?,'!', 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 



CIETY. Prof. E. D. Cope 2748 

unpublished letters concerning his great work on Troy. 
Theodore Stanton 2748 

CURRENT TOPICS. The Bench and Party Politics. The 

Closing of Congress. Gen. M. M. Trumbull 2751 


George Henry Lewes and "The Open Court." J. Har- 
rison Ellis 2752 


NOTES 2754 



The Open Court 

A. ^?^^EEK:IiY journal 

Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion AArith Science. 

No. I 88. (Vol. V.-6 ) 

CHICAGO, APRIL 2, 1891. 

( Two Dollars per Year. 
i Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



In subscribing to the opinion of Auguste Comte, 
John Stuart Mill declared that "the clumsy method 
of regulating by competition the proportion of product 
that goes to the workman, may represent a practical 
necessity, but certainly does not represent a moral 
ideal ; and that until operatives and employers ac- 
complish the work of industry in the spirit in which 
soldiers accomplish that of an army, industry will never 
be moralised." 

When these lines were written, a generation ago, 
such matters were looked upon by practical men as 
entirely out of their line, but, as Freeman says, "when 
statesmen who pride themselves chiefly on common 
sense, when newspapers which pride themselves on a 
certain air of dignified infallibility, make light of a 
question or of a movement, when they scorn it, when 
they snub it, when they call it sentimental, when they 
rule it to be beyond the range of practical politics, we 
know almost as certainly as we know the next eclipse 
of the moon, that the question will be the most prac- 
tical of all questions before long." 

The advocate of social reform is already in respect- 
able company and the adherence of so practical a 
statesman as Mr. Gladstone must place the movement 
beyond the period of scorn. But it cannot be denied 
that the army of the well-meaning is still composed of 
awkward squads. 

In an article entitled "Mr. Carnegie's Gospel of 
Wealth " the Ex-Premier points out that in our day, 
when the possession of land is no longer the principal 
form of property, the kind of wealth that chiefly grows 
" is what may be called irresponsible wealth ; wealth 
little watched and checked by opinion, little brought 
into contact with duty." To awaken and stimulate a 
sense of responsibility in favor of the suffering poor, 
he advises the formation of a society whose members 
shall pledge themselves to give in charity a part of 
their yearly income, each one to decide for himself in 
advance how much that part shall be. 

Among the different motives that may be relied 
upon to aid in this good work the devotion to others 
that Comte named altrtcisin is mentioned, and this 
word recalls to us its author's own plan of social ame- 

Unfortunately all reference to the sociological doc- 
trines of this greatest of systematisers necessitates a 
preliminary disclaimer of much that will not bear the 
test of his own method and of most of what came after 
the six volumes of Positive Philosophy. We are not 
responsible for the "nervous crisis" and the "virtuous 
passion" that coincided with the initial elaboration of 
his second work and filled it with sentimental mysti- 
cism. History abounds in similar perturbations from 
Troy to Tipperary, and we can only deplore the acci- 
dent that deprived us of a worthy sequel to the writings 
that have placed Comte among the greatest thinkers 
of all time. 

Littre proposed as an exercise for students of his- 
tory the research of what is necessary and of what is 
accidental in historical evolution ; of what might have 
been different and of what could not have been dif- 
ferent ; and he suggests subjects of composition in 
which an accidental is suppressed and a sketch re- 
quired of what would have come to pass in such an 
hypothesis. The accidental depending upon the in- 
tervention in social events of biological, chemical, or 
cosmic conditions ; the necessary depending upon the 
nature of societies and the law of their development. 

As an additional exercise some of the more tangled 
passages of biography or of general history might be 
given, and the students required to look for the woman. 

According to Comte "the political and moral crisis 
that societies are now undergoing arises out of intel- 
lectual anarchy. While stability in fundamental max- 
ims is the first condition of genuine social order, we 
are suffering under an utter disagreement, and until a 
certain number of general ideas can be acknowledged 
as a rallying point of social doctrine our institutions 
can be only provisional." 

This agreement upon fundamental maxims can be 
brought about only by consolidating the whole of our 
acquired knowledge into one body of homogeneous 
doctrine, which will have the assent of all men of 
superior intelligence and thus acquire the support of 
an enlightened public opinion. "There can be no 
doubt that the legitimate complaints lodged by the 
masses against a system under which their general 
needs are too little considered, relate to a renovation 
of opinions and manners, and could not be satisfied 
by express institutions. This is especially true in re- 



gard to the evils inherent in the inequality of wealth, 
which afford the most dangerous theme to both agita- 
tors and dreamers ; for these evils derive their force 
much more from our intellectual and moral disorder 
than from the imperfections of political measures." 

Having completed what Mill calls his profound 
and comprehensive analysis of history, and traced the 
progress of humanity in the past, Comte proceeded to 
institute an elaborate system for the reorganisation of 
society; as if the science of sociology had been already 
far advanced. Littr6 explains what had really been 
done, besides the establishment of the method, by 
comparing this sketch of the development of history 
to what would be in biology a treatise on the evolution 
of the individual from age to age ; and, continuing the 
comparison, he says that in sociology there had been 
no treatise equivalent to a physiology. 

Notwithstanding the ridiculous final result of this 
attempt to accomplish, by a change from the objective 
to the subjective method, what must be the work of 
succeeding generations, it is interesting to note cer- 
tain points of resemblance between Comte's plan, half 
a century old, and the tendencies of to-day. 

At the base of his system is the division between 
the spiritual and the temporal authority. During the 
Middle Ages the church "constituted a power that 
infused morality into political government." Unity of 
faith gave the Pope and the clergy authority over 
kings in the interpretation of God's will ; and equally 
respected by all, the priest became the guide of the 
strong and the protector of the weak. This unity 
having ceased to exist, the spiritual power must fall 
to the representatives of the new unity and a body of 
philosophers is created to direct education, show all 
men their duty and hold them to it with the aid of 
public opinion. These, like all other members of the 
speculative class, must renounce riches and political 
employment and content themselves with a modest 
subsidy and universal consideration. 

The temporal government will be in the hands of 
capitalists whose dignity and authority will correspond 
with the generality of their operations ; the bankers in 
the first rank, then the merchants, then the manu- 
facturers, and finally the agriculturists, with the great 
mass of workmen at the base. Alter dividing the dif- 
ferent nations into a number of small republics, the 
chief authority in each is given to a triumvirate of its 
three principal bankers, who are to have charge of 
the state department, the interior department, and the 
treasury department. There will be no need of a sec- 
retary of war, or of a secretary of the navy, and the 
postmaster-general, being a man of letters, will prob- 
ably represent the spiritual power as a delegate from 
the High Priest of Humanity, unless present signs 

The capitalist is regarded as a public functionary 
and his relations to society are similar to those ap- 
proved bj' many socialists, but Comte proposed to ac- 
complish by education and the force of public opinion 
what they would establish by political institutions. 
According to his plan we must discard the distinction 
between public and private functions. "There is a 
public utility in the humblest office of co-operation, no 
less than in the loftiest function of government. Other 
men would feel, if their labor were but systematised, 
as the private soldier feels in the discharge of his 
humblest duty, the dignity of public service, and the 
honor of a share in the action of the general economy." 

He saw in the influence that belonged to men of 
letters and to metaphysicians in his day a partial rec- 
ognition of the necessity of a separate spiritual gov- 
ernment, and this influence has increased as meta- 
physics have become more and more like systematised 
common sense, and as the power of the press to mould 
opinion and control practical politics has grown with 
the extension of journalism. 

Still there is no subsidised body of public censors 
in sight, and the members of the press have not yet 
shown a devotion to the "modesty" of their stipend, 
and an aversion to temporal power that would indi- 
cate the speculative vocation. Regarding their ap- 
pointment as ministers to foreign courts, it is in strict 
accordance with the system of the great positivist, who 
placed international relations in charge of the spirit- 
ual authority ; but, of course, it is possible that Presi- 
dent Harrison was not influenced by this fact. 

Another example of the spirit of the system is seen 
in the endeavor of the committees of one hundred,, 
more or less, to moralise politics. In one of our states 
such influence recently kept the prot6g6 of a thief from 
being elected governor, and as the unsuccessful can- 
didate has since been arrested several times for em- 
bezzlement, it is generally admitted, outside of polit- 
ical circles, that the interference was not unwise. 

The members of the clergy that have given up per- 
functory sparring with the devil and gone at him with 
a will by "taking the pulpit into politics" are also in 
accord with what Comte considered the duty of the 
spiritual power. 

If we turn to things temporal we find greater simi- 
larity between what is and what he said ought to be 
in this industrial era, for capital reigns supreme. The 
forms of a representative government are still retained 
but the sovereign people are not consulted in the 
choice of the lobby and the lobby makes the law. But 
there is one marked difference between the present 
condition of affairs and that established by the System, 
of Positive Politics ; in the latter wealth governs di- 
rectly and is responsible to public opinion, and if plu- 
tocracy is not a mere perturbation but has come to. 



stay, the sooner it takes on this responsibihty the bet- 
ter. Some may say, as did a certain wealthy French 
financier just before the Revolution, "why innovate, 
are not we comfortable?" but they should profit by 
his later unpleasant experience. 

Those of us who have not yet sufficient]}' outgrown 
our prejudices to look with equanimity on Comte's 
division of society into rich and poor, even if the lat- 
ter are to have the wisest of care, may be pardoned 
for asking if there are not some immoral and abnor- 
mal influences at work to foster the present tendency. 
Of course, if it is found to belong to the regular order 
of development all we can do is to make the best of 
it. But even in that case we need not countenance 
every method of acceleration. We are not obliged, 
because we admit that the Indian must make way for 
the white man, to rejoice at the starving of squaws 
and pappooses by a political heeler. It may be that 
this concentration of wealth in the hands of the few 
lies in the inevitable course of industrial progress, 
but we are not therefore bound to promote it by every 
form of corruption that ingenuity can devise. Whether 
it is so or not may be a very hard question to answer, 
owing to the complication of facts to be considered, 
but it is generally admitted that stealing is wrong and 
that bribery is wrong ; would it not be fair to try what 
effect the suppression of these two in all their forms 
would have on this concentration? Perhaps it might 
not be found so necessary to abolish modest independ- 
ence in the name of progress. The gospel of wealth 
is good but the gospel of justice is better. 

If after paying the expenses of favorable legislation 
the industrial genius is able to amass millions he should 
not be too sure that all is for the best in a model world 
because he has used part of his surplus to endow a 
library. We may honor him by comparison, but per: 
haps the money would have done much more good if 
it had gone into the pockets of the operatives as fairly 
earned wages. There might be no library, and it is 
possible that the material benefit would be less, but 
the knowledge that an employer was paying more than 
he was obliged to pay would have gone further toward 
solving an important social problem than all the books 
in the world. 

There are^ many cheap ways of proving that this 
is not "practical" but the fact remains. 

What is and what is not practicable in an indus- 
trial sense, must be learned by future experience, but 
the moral principles that relate to man's intercourse 
with man are the result of past experience reaching 
back at least as far as Adam. They are worthy of 
respectful consideration. 

There is no easy road to social reform, but if those 
who desire it were to give up their petty squabbling 
over matters of no earthly importance and unite in ap- 

plying these principles to every-day affairs there would 
be an immediate improvement. The best way to 
work for society while the more able are generalising 
and co-ordinating the speculations of common sense, 
is to look about near home and attack such evils as 
are condemned by all honest men irrespective of creed. 
This will keep us busy, and it maybe said, in passing, 
that it is not fair for other nations to use this country 
as a dumping ground for social problems. 

Above all let us beware of the man that has found 
an economic mare's nest. 



Some time ago there was much discussion among 
the violins as to the conditions of harmony, and a 
meeting was convened to discuss the important sub- 
ject. The debate was opened by an instrument of 
moderate experience, who affirmed that the strings are 
the seat of harmony. The breaking of the strings 
causes the total loss of harmony, and if a single string 
is the least out of tune there is a beginning of discord. 
When all the strings are in perfect tune then can the 
finest music be performed, but let one of them be 
dissonant, and the heaven of harmony is destroyed. 
Where harmony is there is music, for music and har- 
mony are functions of the strings. But there cannot 
be harmony without use, and the gradual loss of tone 
through want of use denotes the atrophy of harmony 
and music. 

The violin sat down amidst loud applause and was 
succeeded by an instrument of less age but greater 
note. Harmony, said he, is the denial of self in the 
concert of instruments, and the power of self-denial is 
greatest in the prime of life. Age kills music as well 
as harmony. We must all grow old, but we need not 
grow old prematurely. Premature old age is the pen- 
alty of those who depart from the laws of harmony. 
And what a penalty ! Age does not enjoy, and does 
not suffer even. It has no emotion, and therefore has 
neither harmony nor music. Being put on the shelf 
or hung on the wall is the usual fate of old violins, 
and that is not happiness. We may apply the remark 
of a noted octogenarian, full of human wisdom, who, 
when asked whether old age is unfeeling, answered : 
" It has not vital energy enough to supply the waste 
of the more exhausting emotions." A violin who has 
grown old in the service of harmony must have every 
faculty benumbed, and drop off quietly into sleep under 
the benign influence of "nature's kindly anodyne." 
Happiness is contingent upon the faculties of vibra- 
tion and resonance, and these have decayed in the old 

* The article by Mr. Swift in No. 185 of The Ofen Court expresses his be- 
lief, but that it expresses the truth I do not believe, and the ideas embodied 
in the present Allegory came into my mind. 



The speaker was continuing in this strain when 
time was called. He was followed by an instrument 
of mature years who was noted for his tone of pro- 
fundity. I quite approve, said he, of what the pre- 
ceding speakers have uttered. At last it is proved 
that the physical and the harmonious are one. They 
have the same basis, and although we can distinguish 
between them by analysis, the differentiation is purely 
fictitious. Discordant notes are as physical as the box 
or the strings. They flow from the dissonance of the 
physical elements, and result from the breach of the 
laws of harmony as well as from physical causes. Rest 
assured, my friends, that no action which does not 
tend in any of its consequences to the destruction of 
the instrument is inharmonious. Thus all harmony 
and all music, the attainment of happiness and heaven, 
come at last to this — the perfection of the instrument. 

These sentiments were greeted with tumultuous 
scrapings, which had not subsided when an old violin 
arose. His venerable appearance imposed silence, al- 
though it was evident that he was looked upon as an 
intruder. He began by saying that the strings are 
not everything. They are useless without a box or 
body through which their vibration can be commun- 
icated to the air and its undulations rendered sonorous 
and musical in tone. The strings if broken may be 
replaced, but any defect in the box itself is irremedi- 
able. Then indeed can it be said that the heaven of 
harmony is destroyed. It is not true that harmony 
and music are functions of the strings, they are the 
functions of the whole instrument, and divine is the 
music which issues from it when touched by a master 
hand. Without use there cannot be harmony, of 
course, but although disuse may ruin the strings, it will 
not affect the body of the instrument, if its material is 
sound and duly seasoned and varnished. 

The old violin continued, with some emotion, I 
deny that the power of self-restraint on which harmony 
depends is less in age than in middle life. To say 
that age kills harmony or music is a libel. Premature 
old age may do so, because it is due to an infringe- 
ment of the laws of harmony and nature, but age itself 
is no penalty. It has not the passion of youth, but it 
is not devoid of feeling, and it has suffering and en- 
joyment commensurate with this feeling. Is it not 
happiness to rest after the turmoil of a long and busy 
life, spent even in promoting harmony ! But that rest 
is not emotionless. The echoes of the past still re- 
verberate amid the recesses of the instrument, which 
can live over again in memory the triumphs of former 
days. It is justly entitled to tranquil repose after its 
many years of service, but its tones are not gone, and 
they gain in mellowness what they may have lost in 
strength. But what avails even the finest qualities, 
the most modulated tones, unless they are received 

and interpreted by a sympathetic mind ! Thus the 
physical and the harmonious are not one in the sense 
intended by the former speaker. They have the same 
basis in nature, but they are separate expressions of 
it, and the mind which creates the harmony can bet- 
ter dispense with the instrument than the instrument 
with the mind. Nor can we say that no action is in- 
harmonious which does not tend to the destruction of 
the instrument. If this were true, it would follow that 
every such action is harmonious ; but how could this 
be if it had no relation to the instrument itself? And 
what is the good of a perfect instrument unless its per- 
fection is utilised for the happiness of others ! We 
cannot live for ourselves alone. We are members of 
a community and as such we have certain duties to 
perform to each other and to society at large. How- 
ever perfect in structure and action may be the in- 
strument, it can produce no real harmony unless in 
making use of its powers it seeks to benefit others. 
In conclusion I repeat that old age is not unfeeling or 
devoid of happiness, as my master Stradivari well 
knew. And thereupon he burst into a melody whose 
ravishing tones so enraptured his hearers that, on a 
vote being taken, he was almost unanimouslj' declared 
to have carried the day. 


The loss of the Utopia revives the controversy between speed 
and safety as qualities of a ship ; and also the important question, 
how much human freight may an emigrant ship carry in propor- 
tion to its tonnage ? It would be ironical flattery to call the steer- 
age company packed into the Utopia by the dignified name of^ 
passengers ; they were common freight, and like freight they went 
down to the bottom of the sea. Every year the inventive genius 
of man increases the speed of ships, until now the voyage across 
the Atlantic is a job of less than a week for a first class racer on a 
first class line. Unfortunately the means of safety have not grown 
in proportion to the increase of speed. A hundred dollars to one- 
that there is not a passenger ship sailing between New York and 
Liverpool that in actual danger can lower a boat in three minutes ; 
and the same wager that any ship in the navy can do it in ten 
seconds ; why ? Because the crew of a man of war is drilled, 
while the ship's tackle is always in good order. This is not the 
case on passenger ships where many of the crew are new men 
shipped merely for that voyage. Steamship companies will deny 
all this, and say that their crews are drilled like those of a man of 
war ; and yet whenever an accident happens we always read the 
same slory, "Orders were immediately given to lower the boats, 
but — but — but," — and then come the melancholy reasons why; the 
ropes being foul, the blocks rusty, and no axes handy, the boats 
were of no avail. 

It may be that in this particular disaster, owing to the strength 
of the gale, or the severity of her wounds, the Utopia could not 
possibly lower her boats quick enough to save her people ; but had 
the sea been smooth as glass, without a zephyr to wrinkle its face, 
it would not have made any difference, the catastrophe would 
have been the same ; not a boat would have been lowered in time, 
as I have good reason to know. Several years ago I was a pas- 
senger on this very same Utopia from London to New York, and 
the portents of bad luck hung about her even then. Just before 



she swung from her moorings into the Thames, I observed a quar- 
rel going on between one of the officers and one of the crew. They 
wrestled with each other across the deck, on to the gang plank, 
and down the gang plank to the shore. Here they were parted, 
the officer coming back, and the sailor staying on the land, whence 
he fired anathema upon the ship. He was the Dick Deadeye of 
the crew, and it was well to put him ashore. He had cast the 
horoscope of the Utopia, and his evil auguries filled the passengers 
with superstitious fear. Looking up at us as we were bidding 
friends good bye, he patronized us with sinister ajly, and nis green- 
eyed sorrow for our anticipated fate v;as touching in the extreme. 
"That ship is doomed," he said, "and, I am sorry for you all. 
She is rated A i on the unlucky list ; and she will never reach 
New York without an accident. The rats left her this morning 
before daylight ; she is a condemned old tub and you had better 
come ashore." Just then the Utopia began puffing her way back- 
wards out of the dock ; and the soothsayer continued, "O, listen 
to that cough ! " he said, "she cannot live a week, and when she 
sinks, remember what I said." 

I am not weakly superstitious, and yet I confess to dread fore- 
boding when I hear the babbling raven croaking "Nevermore." 
I knew then, as well as I know now, that there is no potency in 
curses, although there is in blessings, and yet I would rather that 
this envious and dismal mariner had given us a different farewell. 
I really did not shake him off my soul until after we bad cleared 
the dangerous coast of England, and were well out upon the open 
sea. Then everything went merrily until we plunged into that 
eternal fog which would have turned Columbus back, had he not 
steered far to the southward where the fog was not. Suddenly 
there in the gloaming appeared the ghost of a full-rigged ship 
bearing down upon us with her sails all set. The refraction of 
the foggy atmosphere, or some other cause, magnified the spectre, 
and she seemed to sail upon the low, damp clouds, and not upon 
the sea. Surely this must be the Flying Dutcliiiian, the phantom 
ship that sailors dread. Not so ; this was a live reality, for we 
could hear fierce orders from the captain to his crew, as he turned 
his helm a port to give us way ; too late, and his manoeuvre brought 
him broadside on the Utopia, which promptly pierced his vessel 
to the heart, and she turned over like a whale in death, floating 
for a time with her keel above the waves. She was a hard work- 
ing craft, earning an honest living by carrying kerosene oil, ten 
thousand barrels of it, from New York to Rotterdam, and she bore 
the classic name of Helios. With the great wide ocean free to 
both of them, what perverse concord was it that impelled the 
Helios and the Utopia to cross the Atlantic in opposite directions, 
on a line of travel not wider than a street ? And meet each other 
in the fog ? 

Now comes the moral of my story, which indeed is all there 
is of interest about it. There was the crew of the Helios flung 
suddenly into the sea, contending with the billows and calling for 
help ; and there was the Utopia stunned and bewildered, reeling 
into the fog. " Lower the boats," commanded the captain of the 
Utopia ; and the sailors flew to the task, but it was the same old 
story ; the knots in the ropes bad rusted and stiffened so that they 
could not be untied : nothing would work as it ought to work, and 
it required minutes instead of seconds to lower a couple of boats 
wherewith to pick up the drowning crew. Fortunately, the barrels 
of oil in the hold of the Helios floated the wreck for a time, and 
the crew managed to climb on to the keel of the ship, as she wal- 
lowed upside down in the sea. This gave the sailors on the Utopia 
time to lower the boats and save the men on the wreck. Had a 
hole been made in the Utopia as would have been the case had 
she struck her foe obliquely, not a boat could have been lowered 
before the vessel would have sunk. That is the lefson of it. 

lesson of no use to the Utopia, for she was no more competent to 
lower a boat when she was stabbed to death in the bay of Gibral- 
tar than she was when she herself smote the Helios on the Great 
Banks of Newfoundland. Her case is not an exception, but an ex- 
ample. Every emigrant ship takes the like chances, and under 
similar circumstances their human cargoes must meet the same 
fate. Every ship should carry boats enough to save all her 
passengers, and the crew should be drilled in the methods of lower- 
ing boats, and in the practice of all other means of safety. But it 
would cost a little time, and time is money. 

It is generally supposed that discipline and drill are only of 
mechanical assistance, and that they are nothing but physical 
agencies of great utility, but having no moral qualities of their 
own. This is a mistake. Discipline strengthens not only the hands, 
but also the hearts of men ; and a crew of sailors well drilled and 
under discipline, is braver than a crew inexperienced and un- 
trained. It is the same with soldiers too. Courage is one manifes- 
tation of the human soul under discipline. A well drilled company 
on either land or sea will face danger bravely from a sense of duty, 
while the very same men undriiled will retreat in panic, moved by 
the instinct of self-preservation. It is not so much cowardice, as 
want of drill, that makes a crew trample down the passengers and 
escape in the boats from a sinking ship. Sailors under discipline 
never do it. 

Forty years ago the Birkenhead was carrying a regiment of 
British soldiers from one post to another. Sailing along the coast 
of Africa, in fair weather, and in sight of land, she struck a sunken 
rock and broke her back. Then the colonel ordered the troops to 
form on deck as it upon parade. This they did, and here is what 
he said, ' ' Men, the ship is breaking up, but there are boats enough 
to save the women and children. Let the sailors have them for 
that purpose, but let no soldier leave the ranks." Not a soldier 
moved out of his place, while the sailors put all the women and 
children into the boats and started for the shore. Then the colonel 
took his place at the head of the regiment and he and his men 
went down with the ship. 

The Duke of Wellington was commander of the army at the 
time, and when a report of the affair was made to him, he simply 
remarked "Good discipline! Good discipline!" It was thought 
that he might at least have paid a tribute to the bravery of the 
men, but he did not. He took the bravery for granted ; he knew 
that without the discipline it would have been cowardice, and that 
the same soldiers would have trampled everybody down in crowd- 
ing into the boats. He knew that it was discipline which had 
crowned physical strength with moral courage, and so he merely 
said, " Good discipline I Good discipline ! " Drilling sailors at 
lowering boats will not only make them skilful to perform that 
duty, but it will also make them courageous to help the passengers 
into them before trying to save themselves. 

M. M. Tkumbull 



Massive, sky-towering, rugged as rude rock 

That skirts some coast of thy leal stalwart land ; 

Formed to invite, and to repel the shock 

Of thine own ages, head, and heart, and hand : 

Giant of world, where springs of thought, close coiled. 
Are found by master-minds mechanic place, 

Carlyle, whose force hath been so strangely foiled 
Through lack, or lapse of Charity's sweet grace. 

Strong storm-scarred soul, though unpossessed by strength 

Sprung panoplied from head of sympathy. 
Thee must we hail, throughout our island length, 

Preacher profound in sad prose harmony. 



Peasant, yet preacher — prophet wast thou born, 

Grim Jeremiah of our century, 
Hadst thou not felt our Christian faith outworn. 

Thou hadst been swathed in cramping clerisy. 

Still, none the less, a pulpit-voice was thine. 
Thundering athwart a boisterous sea of sin. 

Invoking human vengeance and divine. 

On flattering shows without, foul cores within. 

Virtue and wisdom didst thou sometimes brand, 
Fury and folly didst thou sometimes crown ; 

Sightless to grandeur in thy native land, 

Heroes shrank from thee frozen at thy frown. 

True Titanolater of noble mould. 

Something of manhood's mercy did'st thou miss ; 
The marble heart, the steel-clad arm of old 

Gleamed God-like from another age than this. 

Men must be herded with an iron goad, 

Dropped from Olympus into hero hand ; 
Relentless will must point them out the road. 

Resistless force slay stragglers from the band. 

Cursed be Man's softening of the rule of God, 

Or demi-God, or priest-annointed king ; 
Cursed be poor fools who scorn to kiss the rod 

Upraised to urge under a heavenly wing. 

Such thy despotic and despairing creed, 

The gloomy birth of gall-embedded brain ; 
Angels and fiends of early epoch's need. 

Though dead to thee, for us must live again. 

They shall not. Yet shall thy majestic law 

Of ethic empire thrill the sceptic soul. 
Touched by an impulse that, divine no more, 

Shall grander grow as generations roll. 



To the Editor of The Open Court : — 

As one deeply perplexed concerning the question of freewill, 
I have taken peculiar interest in the controversy between yourself 
and Mr. Maddock. But, after all, are you not like the knights of 
old that disputed about the color of the shield ? 

Mr. Maddock represents man's relations to the universe by 
the hands of a clock, while you suggest the regulator. The latter 
is no better ; because the counter action stops in the works, but 
we have a piece of mechanism that does represent man's relations 
to the universe, and also shows us both sides of the shield in a 
strong clear light. 

When a boy I worked in a woolen factory wherein were em- 
ployed various machines — looms, breakers, condensers, etc. Fre- 
quently one of the breakers would be stopped and immediately the 
various parts of the other machines would begin [to move with 
greater speed. The engineer would go to the engine, turn a little 
wheel and the machinery would soon slow up to its former gait. 
Presently the breaker would be started again and the other ma- 
chines would move too slow. Again the engineer would hasten to 
the engine, turn the wheel a little, and the proper movement would 
quickly be attained. Later the owners of the factory had a gov- 
ernor attached to the engine, and here we may ask what is our 
engine in its present form ? Is it a creation or simply a product 
of evolution ? If man, the immediate antecedent cause, is himself 
a result of evolution there seems no other alternative but to admit 
that our engine is likewise a product of evolution. 

Now I imagine yourself and Mr. Maddock looking at this en- 
gine in action. An increase of speed is noticed, and you see the 
governor raise its arms slightly and the speed is checked before 
any harm is done. A little later the action is too slow : the gov- 
ernor, like a thing of intelligence, promptly lowers its arms, and 
all moves on as before. You see in this governor a something 
which as a fact reacts on the source of its own power to act, itself 
being promptly reacted on, to the regulation of its own action, 
and so far exercises freedom, "the lesser overcomes the greater," 
the creature modifies the creator. But you also see how the piston- 
rod by moving slower gives the motive to the governor that deter- 
mines its motion, and so gives us determinism. Mr. Maddock 
sees that the governor is not at liberty to raise its arms when the 
piston moves slowly, but on the contrary must of necessity lower 
them, and seen from this side we have necessity. Mr. Maddock 
seems to contend that to regard the governor as a free agent it 
must raise its arms even when the movement becomes slower 
which is contrary to law, while you apparently go to the opposite 
extreme and contend that if it were of necessity that the governor 
lowered its arms they would have fallen even if the motion had 
been accelerated, equally contrary to law. Nature certainly re- 
veals no such freedom as Mr. Maddock would dispose of, but it is 
a fact that there has been evolved a something that reacts on the 
prime factor of its action in a way to secure a determining prin- 
ciple in its own conduct. Thus looking at the engine with its at- 
tachment we see determinism which for all practical ethical pur- 
poses is equivalent to freewill — it secures the harmony sought. 
Nor is there that absolute necessity which you would dispose of, 
but carrying our view to the machinery connected with the engine 
we see that the action of the governor could not have been other- 
wise than it was. Thus the broader view gives us that fatalistic 
conception that everything is just as it is and could not have been 
otherwise. The more limited and keener view that you seem to 
take of the matter constrains you to regard the office of the en- 
gineer, in turning the little wheel, as actually transferred to the 
governor so that it henceforth acts independent of his governing 
and determining power, and works of itself to secure the regularity 
desired, — acts " from a will determined by its own nature and not 
by a foreign compulsion " exercised by the engineer. But the 
wider view of Mr. Maddock, though it fails to recognise the reac- 
tive influence of the governor, discovers that the office of the en- 
gineer has been combined with that of the man who starts and 
stops the breaker, and that the action of the governor, indirectly, 
is still determined by foreign compulsion. Cyrus Cole. 

Garden City, Kansas. 

To the Editor of The Open Court:— 

In your "Ethical Problem "you remark: " Before we com- 
mence building let us have a plan." I will add, and a foundation 
to rest upon, free from contradiction. I have no other motive in 
my persistence on this question than the one above named. In 
your definition of determinism I fail to see a foundation free from 
contradiction. It is no clearer to my mind than Calvinism. As 
determinism teaches that the will is not free you cannot logically 
say that it is. If all actions are determined by law they cannot be 
the result of freedom. A happy union is not the result of free- 
dom ; it is the outcome of law — law which produces harmony. 
Let me illustrate : If you present the north pole of a magnet to the 
south pole of another magnet you will have a perfect union, be- 
cause there is attraction in both poles. This union is of law, not 
of freedom. Free the metal from the law of attraction and the 
union ceases. The metal must obey the law which conditions it ; 
it has no freedom in the matter. So with man and wife: If they 
are conditioned to love there will be a union of hearts ; and they 
K'/// to love because they are conditioned by law like the two mag- 
nets; therefore their wills are subject to the law which conditions 



them and are not free. Under the circumstances they musl will 
that way : they are bound by the law of their conditions, and can- 
not loose themselves. Freedom would be to have power to will a 
union of north pole to north pole, which is impossible. You do 
not reason from induction ; you reason from the organism not 
from the cause of its conditions. You say, " the union is free be- 
cause the act of uniting results from a freewill, from a will deter- 
mined by its own nature ; and you stop reasoning here when you 
ought to go on to the inductive point, and say, and its own, or 
specific nature is conditioned by natural law and its condition is 
the cause of its willing. The Hon wills to eat lamb because it is 
conditioned by nature to eat lamb. If it was conditioned like a 
lamb it would will to eat grass. Will therefore is governed by 
law and is not free. Here is determinism without contradiction 
and here is the firm foundation to build upon ; we must give due 
credit to the architect as well as to the building. Freedom is not 
implied in necessity but harmony is. If freedom were the potent 
factor the magnet could roam around the compass at will, but as 
law is the potent factor it is bound to point to the north owing to 
the conditions of organism and environment. Results will not be 
the same no matter how we act, and vieivi/!aci in accordance 
with laws of organism and environment, sometimes harmoniously 
and sometimes inbarmoniously to ourselves, but never with free- 
dom from law. Monism is not yea and nay ; in it is yea. No logic 
can touch scientific monism. It seems to me that your difficulty 
is in trying to hold on to religion. Monism must be free from 
confusion. Monism must be established and rock-seated, free 
from contradiction and to do that the argument must come from 
science, not from religion. John Haddock. 


I HAVE to correct a wrong notion of Mr. Maddock's concerning 
my definition of freedom. Freedom of will (as I understand and 
define it) does not mean that a man has the power to will the con- 
trary of that which he, according to his character, actually does 
will. Such a freedom does not exist. Freedom of will, if the 
term has any sense at all, means the power of a man to act in ac- 
cordance with his will, i. e. agreeably to his character. 

Mr. Maddock is mistaken when he says: "Determinism 
teaches that the will is not free." Determinism teaches that will- 
ing is determined by law. What is law ? Law is a formula de- 
scribing facts of a special kind. There are not two things, law 
and will, the one dominating, ruling, or governing the other. 
There is but one thing, will, or rather all the many different 
acts of willing. The facts of reality alone are real, and the 
laws of nature are mere abstractions describing the regularity 
of these facts so far as we have been able to trace it. Nature is 
not the slave of law. Nature acts in a certain and definite way ; 
and the way in which nature acts is cnllcl law. That is all. I 
cannot see any slavery in the action of the magnet ; as if magnet- 
ism were one thing, the master, the ruler, and the magnet the 
other thing, the slave, the subject, the suppressed. The idea of 
• ' freeing the metal from the law of attraction " has no sense in my 
conception of nature, for the law of attraction is a part of its na- 
ture ; it has not been imposed upon it as a fetter from the outside ; 
the disposition of being attracted by a magnet is quality of it ; it 
is part of its self. 

What is will ? Will is a state of mind tending to action. If 
such a state of mind exists in a person, we say he wills this or that. 
Now, if there is no hindrance for the will to pass into action, the 
will is free ; if however the will is prevented from passing into ac- 
tion, it is restricted, it is not free. If a person is compelled to do 
an act, which he would not do unless compelled to do it, the action 
does not result from his own state of mind, it is not an expression 
of his own, of his free will. But if a person commits an act be- 

cause in his mind there is a tendency to perform that act, he is free, 
which means he can let his own will pass into act. 

The will of a man, accordingly, if considered as a faculty and 
not as a single state of mind, is a mere abstraction. There is no will 
in a man that wills now this and now that. There are innumerable 
states of mind tending to action, and in speaking of these tendencies 
in general we form the generalisation "will," These innumerable 
tendencies often naturally come in conflict the one with the other. 
Animals, children, savages, or uneducated people are apt to let any 
state of mind that dominates the present moment pass into act, 
rashly, and in that case it will easily happen that the act will after- 
wards be regretted. Thus another state of mind is produced in which 
a tendency prevails to make, if it were possible, the act or its con- 
sequences undone. In this case the liberty of one tendency has un- 
duly overruled other, and perhaps more important, tendencies ; the 
others have been overruled, their right remained unrespected. The 
means to prevent regret is to check every tendency to action as 
soon as it rises, until it has after a comparison with all the other 
tendencies been approved of by a general consensus of all. The 
determination of a man and the actual performance of placing this 
check upon the tendencies to action that live in his soul, is called 

Self-control is the beginning of moral action in so far as it 
suppresses those tendencies that should, according to a careful de- 
liberation, not be carried into effect, and allows only those to pass 
into act which have been approved of by a general consensus of 
the strongest inclination of the soul. 

Moral motives are such as are fit to survive. -Immoral motives 
are such as are contrary to Ihe laws of existence, to life, or to social 
conditions ; they will ruin either the individual or the race, or 

Freedom will lead to the gradual extinction of immoral mo- 
tives and it will strengthen moral motives. We may doubt whether 
a certain act is moral or immoral, because in many single instances 
a moral individual may suffer on account of its very morality ; but 
not in the long run. Morally acting individuals may be sacrificed 
by the thousands and millions, the moral ideals will nevertheless 
be the only ones fit to survive. 

If Mr. Maddock cannot accept the term "freewill" in this 
sense, I suggest to use the term a man's own will. 

I am glad to notice that Professor Clifford took exactly the 
same view of freewill that I do. He says in his essay "Cosmic 
Emotion" "The peculiarity of living matter is that it is capable 
of combining together molecular motions which are invisible, into 
molar motions which can be seen. It therefore appears to have 
the property of moving spontaneously without help from anything 
else. ... Its changes of shape due to aggregation of molecular mo- 
tion, may fairly be called action from within, because the energy 
of the motion is supplied by the substance itself and not by any 
external thing. . . . As, therefore, the immediate origin of my ac- 
tion is in myself, I really am free in the only useful sense of the 


Almost Persuaded. By ll'i// .V. Ifar/vn. New York : Minerva 

Publishing Co. 

The idea of this novel of 316 pages is to illustrate and estab- 
lish the truth of natural ethics as opposed to the dogmatic and in- 
consistent systems of religious sects. Stanley, the hero, is cast 
away on an island at an early age of his life ; there, living in soli- 
tude and in intimate contact with nature, he acquired the founda- 
tion of a sound and natural sense which led him in his after life 
(after he was rescued and educated) to refute by criticism and to 
disprove by practice the accepted notions of truth and conduct in 
the convefttional Christianity of the day. 



The novel is a "novel of tendency," in the sense in which we 
now have so many. We do not think that the execution is equal 
to the conception ; the main emphasis is placed at times on unes- 
sential points; and although there are a number o£ animated pas- 
sages in the book, as a rule the pathetic and sentimental parts lag. 






The Factors of Evolution. By JOSEPH LE CONTE. 

The Physiognomy of the Anarchists. By PROF. CESARE LOMBROSO. 

MisoNEiSM and Philoneism. By PROF. CESARE LOMBROSO. 

The Question of Duality of Mind. By R. M. BACHE. 

Immortality. By DR. G. M. GOULD. 

Some Questions of Psycho-Physics. A Discussion; (i) Sensations and the 

Elements of Reality, by PROF. ERNST MACH ; 12) Feelings and the 

Elements of Feeling, by DR PAUL CARUS. 
European Correspondence. 

1) France— ARREAT. 

2) Italy— LOMBROSO. 

Book Reviews ; Taylor's Origin 0/ the Aryans: Harris's Introduction to Phi 
losophy : Geddes's and Thompson's £?w/k//£7« of Sex: lAovgan's Animat 
Life a7td Intelligence: Mantegazza's Physiognomy and Expression : Booth's 
In Darkest England : Cams Sterne's Allgetneine Weltanschauung in ihrer 
historisclien Entwickelung: and Post's Allgetneine Rechtswissettscha/t. 

Periodicals : Epitomes and critical reviews of the contents of Mind, Inter- 
national jfournal 0/ Ethics. Revue Philosophique , Zeitschriftfilr Psychologic 
und Piiysiologie der Sinjiesorgane, Schriften der Gesellschaft filr psycho- 
logisclie Forscltungy Pliilosophische Monatskefte, Mitierva (Italian), Voprosy 
nioso/ii ipsicliologii (Russian). 


Terms of Subscription : 82.00 a year, postpaid, to any part of the United 
States, Canada, and Mexico; to foreign countries in the Postal Union, S2.25; 
single numbers, 60 cents; postpaid to New South Wales, Victoria, Queens- 
land, Tasmania, S2.50 a year. 



LONDON: Messrs. Walls &- Co., 

17 Johnson's Court, Fleet Street, E. C. 





By Dr. Paul Carus. 

480 Pages, with 152 Illustrative Cuts and Diagrams. — PRICE $3.00. 

Printed on Extra-fine Paper, Handsomely Bo 

1 Cloth. 


169-175 La Salle Street, Chicago, Illinois. 

Publications of THE OPEN COURT Pub. Co., 


By Prof. F. IVIax Mueller 
With a Supplement " MY PREDECESSORS." Cloth, 75 Cents. 

1. COMPARATIVE PHILOLOGY. By Prof. H. Oldenberg. 

2. COMP.«iRATIVE PSYCHOLOGY. By Prof. J. Jastrow. 

3. OLD TES rAMENT HISTORY. By Prof. C. H. Cornill. Cloth, 
75 Cents. 


Three Lectures Delivered at the Invitation of the Board of Trustees be- 
fore the Society for Ethical Culture of Chicago, in June, i8go. Cloth, 50 Cents. 

Including the Controversy with Mr. Lyman J. Gage on the Ethics of the 
Board of Trade ; and also the Controversy with Mr. Hugh O. Pentecost, and 
others, on the Single Tax Question, Cloth, Si. 00. 

don Publishers : Longmans, Green, & Co.) 
The Method of Philosophy as a Systematic Arrangement of Knowledge. 
Cloth, $ 

OF THOUGHT. By F. Max Mueller. (London Publishers : 
Longmans, Green, & Co.) 
I. The Simplicity of Language ; 2. The Identity of Language and Thought ; 
and 3. The Simplicity of Thought. Cloth, 75 Cents. 

don Publishers: Longmans, Green, & Co.) 
Authorised translation. Cloth, 75 Cents. 

fred BiNET. (London Publishers: Longmans, Green, & Co.) 
Authorised translation. Cloth, 75 Cents, 


Illustrated experimental studies in the new psychological theory of double 

personality. Price, 50 Cents. 



$a.oo PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 


COMTE'S GOSPEL OF WEALTH. Louis Belrose. Jr. 2755 

A MORAL ALLEGORY. C. S. Wake 2757 

CURRENT TOPICS. The Loss of the S. S. Utopia. Gen. 

M. M. Trumbull 2758 


Carlyle. Ellis Thurtell 2759 


The Problem of the Freedom of Will. Cyrus Cole and 

John Maddock. With Editorial Comments 27(Jo 




The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion with. Science. 

No. 189. (Vol. V.-7 

CHICAGO, APRIL 9, 1891. 

( Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 


BY L. .1. VANCE. 

We are apt to think of magic as though it were 
conceived in mischief, and brought forth in iniquity. 
We have come to regard magicians as little more than 
tricksters or sleight-of-hand performers, who now call 
themselves by the high-sounding titles of ' Signors ' 
and ' Professors.' 

The notions of magic and of magicians which are 
entertained now-a-days come from two sources — the 
one, oral and traditional, the other, literary and his- 
torical. In other words, modern ideas of magic are 
derived, in whole or in part, from folk-lore or from 

As to those ideas of magic which come from the 
first source — folk-lore — a few words may here be said. 
There is a stage of the human mind in which the agen- 
cies of magic are accepted as the ordinary incidents of 
everyday life. Thus, children at a certain age do not 
hesitate to believe that there are giants fifty feet in 
height, that there are dragons breathing fire. To the 
untutored intelligence of a child, any one kind of man 
or animal is quite as possible as any other kind. .A 
giant as tall as a tree seems no more intrinsically im- 
probable than a Tom Thumb or a Gulliver Brobdignag ; 
nor is it more unlikely that a dragon should breathe 
fire and smoke than that a snake should carry deadly 
poison in its mouth. We remember when the story 
of Aladdin and his Wonderful Lamp was first re- 
hearsed to us ; when such incidents as the changes of a 
man into a Genii, or of a horse into a house, or of flying 
through the air, were not regarded as impossible. 
Now, the semi civilized man looks upon the agencies 
of magic at least as "probable and common as duels 
and concealment of wills seem to be thought by Euro- 
pean novelists." So says Mr. Lang. 

The natural history and evolution of magic are sub- 
jects of more than curious and literary interest. It is 
now a matter of scientific importance to explain how 
magic arose, and why man believed in his will and 
power over the supernatural. 

It may be urged that the ins-and-outs of ancient 
and modern magic are pretty well known. And so 
they are in certain ways. But, neither M. Maury in 
his valuable "History of Magic," nor M. Lenormant 

in his erudite account of "Chaldean Magic," nor Mr. 
Lecky in his celebrated chapter (Chap, i) in "Ra- 
tionalism in Europe," exactly follow the same lines of 
argument that I would present here. 

In folk-lore, in the science of Tylor, Lang, and 
others, we believe that an explanation will be found. 
To state Mr. Tylor's theory briefly, and by way of an- 
ticipation, man argued himself into a belief in magic, 
by confounding the image with that which it repre- 
sents. Thus, there springs up a set of practices and 
beliefs which we moderns regard as magical.* 

Let us take an example where the connection be- 
tween object and figure is supposed to be real. One of 
the commonest acts of magic in ancient and modern 
times is the act of making an image and shooting at it, 
melting it away, drying it up, sticking pins into it, 
that the original may be hurt or injured. The practice 
was known to Plato, and is to day in vogue among 
Southern Negroes, as Mr. Cable informs us. 

Here we find that semi-cultured man reasons him- 
self into a theory of magic by association of ideas. He 
argues, in brief, that like affects like. In his mind, 
the slightest resemblance between any two things is 
enough to make them stand in the relation of cause 
and effect. Now, just as the ginseng was said by the 
Chinese and North American Indians to possess cer- 
tain magical virtues because the roots resemble the 
human body, so the Zulus sacrificed black cattle in 
order to bring black clouds of rain. 

But there are many, many kinds of magical beliefs 
and practices which cannot be explained at all on the 
"like to like" theory. Thus, the world-wide belief in 
the miraculous powers of Shamans and "medicine- 
men" proceeds from quite a different train of reasoning. 
At this point, let us state briefly some of the objects 
of this inquiry. It is not necessary to examine every 
odd and end of magic. For, magic is so simple, yet 
so subtle, so plain, yet so deceitful, that many curious 
bits of art and artifice do not need or deserve any ex- 
planation. We are now concerned with the natural 
history of magic. We are thus called upon to show 
the state of mind out of which magic has been evolved. 
We must find, if possible, the general principles which 
underlie all magical reasoning. Our object, then, is 
to prove that the putting of these principles into every 

*" Early History of Mankind," p. 117, 



day practice is only the exercise of art magic, an art 
to which, as Lang remarks, nothing is impossible. 

Our first question will be, What is the place of 
Magic in the mental development of man? Our an- 
swer is that, "magic belongs to the lowest known 
stages of civilisation." (Castren.) 

For the purposes of this discussion, let us give 
some of the mental characteristics which belong to 
the lowest known stages of culture.* 

i) First, man in the lowest known stages of culture 
never distinguishes between himself and things in 
the outside world. In that stage, again, the mind 
confuses all things, animate or inanimate, organic or 
inorganic, personal or impersonal. Gods and men, 
animals and plants, stars and trees, all seem on the 
same level of life, of feeling, and reason. 

2) Then, there is a stage of human intellectual de- 
velopment known to students as "animism." In that 
stage, as Mr. Tylor and others have demonstrated,' man 
ascribes the attributes of the human "soul" to all 
things, living or non-living. One of the first principles 
of savage belief is the continued existence of the dead. 
Thus, to the semi-cultured mind, the world is more 
alive with human souls than it is with human bodies. 
In Miltonic phrase, "millions of spiritual creatures 
walk the earth unseen " ; but the savage believes that 
spirits of dead men are able to interfere in mundane 
affairs. They can give the living much trouble and so it 
is best to be on the right side of these powerful spirits. 

3) In the third place, there is the wide-spread sys- 
tem of belief known as fetichism. In that stage of 
savage thought, material objects are supposed to be 
the abodes of spiritual beings, or fetiches. A spirit 
resides in every object ; it can also interfere in mun- 
dane affairs. Hence, the savage does all he can to get 
on the right side of his fetich. From this belief there 
arose the worship of plants and animals. Later on, 
plants are not worshipped, but they are endowed with 
magical properties, as charms. 

4) The savage notion of spirits is not all of one 
piece. There are hostile spirits — devils, witches, beast- 
shades, etc. They cause death and disease. "Over 
a great part of Africa, in South America, and Polyne- 
sia," says Mr. Tylor, "when a man dies, the question 
is at once: 'Who killed him?' The Alipones hold 
that there is no such thing as natural death, no man 
would die unless he were killed," — by some evil spirit 
or conjurer. f From the savage notion that a man's 
spirit or strength may reside in his spittle, in his heart, 
in his nails, or in a lock of his hair — from this notion, 
there arises another, namely, that a man may be be- 
witched or conjured against his will. 

*The voluminous evidence for these mental processes of savages will be 
found in the works of Lubbock, Tylor, Waitz, McLennan and others, 
t Early History of Mankind, p. 134 

5) Connected with all the preceding peculiarities 
of savage thought is the belief in sorcery. "The 
world and all the things in it, being conceived of 
vaguely as sensible and rational, are supposed to obey 
the commands of certain members of each tribe, chiefs, 
jugglers, conjurors, or what you will. "* These ma- 
gicians, like Owen Glendower, are not "in the roll of 
common mortals." They can influence spirits, can 
talk with the dead, and can visit the Land of Shadows. 
They work miracles, cause or cure diseases, and can 
bring thunder, lightning and rain. There is little or 
nothing these fellows cannot do, if they have a mind to 
do it. The miraculous powers of the Shaman or con- 
juror is based on the savage view of himself and of the 
outward world. 

6) To all this should be added the fact that the 
savage is credulous and curious. The cunning medi- 
cine-man plays also upon the hopes and fears of his 
fellows. His claim of supernatural powers, of being 
able to work miracles, is admitted by savage men all 
over the world. The reason is that, the miraculous 
attainments of the Shaman or medicine- man are not 
believed to be rare or unusual. On this point, the 
testimony of Jacob Baegert is interesting. Baegert 
was a Jesuit father and missionary among the Indians 
of Southern California. He thus describes the claims 
of the conjuror. "There always existed among the 
Californians, individuals of both sexes who played the 
part of conjurors, prete?iding to possess the power of 
exorcising the devil, whom they never saw ; of curing 
diseases which they never healed ; and of producing 
pithahayas, though they could only eat them. Some- 
times they went into caverns, and, changing their 
voices, made the people believe that they conversed 
with some spiritual power. They threatened also with 
famine and disease, or promised to drive away small- 
pox, or similar plagues, "f The whole passage is 
valuable, because it furnishes a key to one kind of 
magic. Baegart naturally came to this conclusion : 
"The object of these impostors was to obtain their 
food without the trouble of gathering it in the fields ; 
for the silly people provided them with the best they 
could find /;/ order to keep them in good humor and to 
enjoy their favor." 

No wonder that savage magic seems to the civilised 
mind, foolish and childish. Such is ancient magic. 
How could it be otherwise when we take into account 
the elements of thought and belief out of which it 
was fashioned? It is difficult for us moderns to re- 
alise the frame of mind which gave rise to magical 
trains of thought. That is to say, magic was the nat- 
ural product and outcome of the beliefs above named : 
the belief in the continued existence of the dead ; the 

* Myth, Ritual atid Religion, Vol, I, p. 47, 
t Smithsonian Rep, 1S63. p, 352. 



belief in power of good and evil spirits or ghosts ; the 
belief in fetiches ; the belief in the animated character 
of all things ; the belief in the miraculous powers of 
medicine-men, and so forth. Such beliefs are clearly 
reflected in the magic of the savage — a magic which 
could satisfy only the untutored mind. 

(to be continued.) 


Mr. Goldwin Smith discusses the ethical ques- 
tion in an article in the last J^or urn, entitled "Will 
Morality survive Religion?" He presents no definite 
solution but sufificientl}' indicates one, and that is a 
denial of the question ; between the lines we read the 
answer. Morality will not survive Religion. He says : 

" The withdrawal of religious belief must, however, one would 
think, have begun to operate, and some observers may be in a po- 
sition to say what the effect is and how far philosophy or science 
has been able to fill the void. As the twilight of theism and Chris- 
tianity still lingers, nobody expects a sudden change. Least of all 
does anybody expect a sudden outbreak of immorality among phi- 
losophers, whose minds are elevated by their pursuit and in whom 
the coarser appetites are sure to be weak ; so that the sensitive- 
ness which men of this class are apt to show, whenever a connec- 
tion is suggested between religious and moral agnosticism, is out 
of place." 

Mr. Goldwin Smith illustrates his position vividly 
by presenting to us "some specimens of the moral as 
well as of the religious agnostic." The murderer Bir- 
chall is described in the following words : 

" As he was the son of a clergyman and had been well brought 
up, he must have been thoroughly enlightened, and cannot have 
been led into crime by anything like the brutal ignorance of moral 
law which is often the heritage of the gutter child. Nor does it 
seem that evil passion of any kind was overpoweringly strong in 
him. The attempts of the enemies of capital punishment to make 
out a case of moral insanity were in this case more faint than 
usual. It even appears that there was an amiable side to his 
character. His college companions liked him. He seems to have 
been a loving husband, and there was something touching and al- 
most heroic in the effort which he successfully made, while he was 
awaiting execution, to master the fear of death and to write his 
autobiography for the benefit of his wife. The autobiography, it 
is true, is nothing more than the vulgar record of a fast under- 
graduate's life at an inferior college ; but this does not detract from 
the nerve shown in writing it, and in illustrating it with comic 
sketches, beneath the shadow of the gallows. He only happened 
to have occasion for his friend's money. It is possible that if 
Birchall, instead of being sent to college — where a youth of his 
stamp was sure to be idle, and, being idle, to become dissipated — 
had been set to regular work in an office under a strong chief, he 
might have gone decently through life, though he would have been 
a very selfish man. But he was a thorough-going agnostic in 
morals as well as in religion. Evidently he felt not a twinge of 
remorse for what he had done. No doubt he cursed his own care- 
lessness in having, when he was destroying all the proofs of iden- 
tity on the corpse, overlooked the cigar case, the name written on 
which gave the fatal clew ; but the recollection of having killed a 
confiding friend for his money evidently gave him no more con- 
cern than as if he had slaughtered a bear for its skin. Bred a gen- 
tleman, he admirably preserved his dignity and impressiveness of 

manner when standing at bay against his pursuers, and he showed 
the same qualities for the two months during which a whole com- 
munity was staring at him through the bars of his cage, when the 
least sign of weakness would have been-at once proclaimed. When 
he was sentenced, he remarked, with a philosophy which appears 
to have been genuine, that life is short for all, and that there is 
not much difference between a term of a few months and one of a 
few years. He might have added that he would make his exit 
from life more nearly without pain than ninety-nine men out of a 

A similar striking case is found in the person of 
William Palmer, the Rugeley murderer, who also, Mr. 
Goldwin Smith says, "was evidently a perfect moral 
agnostic. He behaved at his trial as if he had been 
watching a game of chess, showed not the slightest 
sign of remorse, and met death with perfect apathy, 
if not with Birchall's genteel composure." 

Mr. Goldwin Smith adds : 

"As morat agnostics these men were 'low specimens of a char- 
acter of which the great Napoleon was the highest, . . . He (Napo- 
leon) was simply ' The Prince ' of Machiavelli, that prophet of 
moral agnosticism."* 

The present situation is described in the following 
words : 

"Religious agnosticism is gaining ground, not so much per- 
haps in America as in Europe, because America is less speculative 
than Europe and because free churches do not provoke sceptical 
criticism so much as establishments ; but everywhere religious ag- 
nosticism is manifestly gaining ground. Are we to expect a cor- 
responding growth of moral agnosticism ? We shall not have a 
crop of Birchalls and Palmers, still less of Napoleons ; but may 
we not have a crop of men who will regard morality as a super- 
stition or a convention, and will do what suits their own interest ? 
Greece, after the fall of her religion, had the moral anarchy de- 
picted by Thucydides and ascribed by him to that fall. She had 
the moral agnosticism of the Sophists. Rome, after the departure 
of the religious faith to which Polybius, in a famous passage, as- 
scibes her public morality, had the immorality of the Empire. On 
the decline of the Catholic faith in Europe, ensued the moral ag- 
nosticism of the era impersonated in Machiavelli. In each case, 
into the void left by religion came spiritual charlatanry and phys- 
ical superstition, such as the arts of the hierophant of Isis, the 
soothsayer, and the astrologer — significant precursors of our mod- 
ern ' medium.' " 

* I beg to differ in some respects from this view concerning Napoleon's 
character. Napoleon's success is not due to his unprincipled egotism and un- 
scrupulousness ; it is due to the actual services he rendered to his nation and 
to humanity in general. He may be considered as a " scourge of God " but 
even as such he was the most indispensable man of his era He was a scourge 
to Germany, but his achievements in having swept out of existence so many 
antiquated institutions and principalities, especially in having broken to 
pieces the old rotten Roman-Teutonic Kaiser-humbug, so as to make a regen- 
eration of Germany possible, alone made his career a great blessing to Ger- 
many which outweighs all the innumerable injuries and suppressions he 
caused her. Let us not look to the vices of a man to explain 
am inclined to declare a priori that a successful man must have some ^ 
which are the causes of his success, and if he has great vices, it is, to say the 
least, probable that his virtues will eclipse his vices. The effects of the vir- 
tues will remain, the effects of his vices will disappear in time. 

Does Mr, Goldwin Smith believe in Machiavelli ? I do not believe in 
Machiavelli. The great king who wrote the " Anti-Machiavelli " has refuted, 
not only in words but also in deeds, the theory that unprincipled rascality is the 
best policy for a king to maintain himself upon a throne. It is due to Frederick 
the Great's maxim that "the king is the tirst servant of the state" which 
proved a live presence with almost all his successors, that a scion of his 
family now occupies the imperial throne of Germany. 



We feel inclined to say, this is a very pessimistic 
diagnosis of the future, but we are told : 

"There is nothing pessimistic in this; no want of faith in the 
future of humanity, or in the benevolence of the power by which 
human destiny is controlled. The only fear suggested is that so- 
ciety may have a bad quarter of an hour during the transition, as 
it has had more than once before." 

A ' bad quarter of an hour ' for humanity may mean 
the ruin of nations ! Was the pessimism of Tacitus 
unjustified because other nations arose in a grander 
glory after the ignominious ruin of Rome that followed 
its moral decline ? Pessimism means to us that we 
ourselves and our nation will see this 'bad quarter of 
an hour,' and if it comes it will be terrible to all con- 
cerned. It will come like a deluge to sweep away the 
innocent and the good together with the guilty. 

Pessimism in any other sense is not justified. The 
world is such that if the nation to whom by natural 
advantages the future of humanity seems to be en- 
trusted, shows herself unwilling or unable to fulfil her 
mission, other nations will arise and take her place. 
We Americans especially are more inclined than 
others, and I do not deny that in some respects our 
hope is justifiable, to consider ourselves as the chil- 
dren of promise. But at the same time we are apt to 
forget that our mission implies duties. It is not enough 
to say, "We have Abraham to our father." The chil- 
dren of promise must be worthy of their duties ; if 
they are not they will be rejected. Yet as to the 
whole, as to the evolution of mankind, there is no 
need of being pessimistic. "For I say imto you that 
God is able of these stones to raise up children unto 
Abraham." Evolution will not be checked because we 
prove unfit to carry the torch of progress. We shall, 
in that case, go to the wall and the torch will be 
handed to others. 

And here we come to the point of disagreement 
with Mr. Goldwin Smith. He says : 

" Evolution is not moral, nor can morality be educed from it. 
It proclaims as its law the survival of the fittest, and the only proof 
of fitness is survival." 

Evolution, it is true, is in a certain sense, " a quasi- 
mechanical and necessary process" ; it "will fulfil it- 
self without effort or sacrifice" on my part, or on your 
part, or on the part of any individual. Yet in another 
sense, evolution is not a merely mechanical process;* 
nor can it fulfil itself without the effort or sacrifice of 
mankind. The question is not whether my help is in- 

* Every motion is mechanically explainable, o 
lion can be described in mechanical formulas, i 
motions which can be formulated in the laws of i 
sidered as a movement sweeping onward 
ical process. But the mechanical aspect of natu 
it does not cover the whole of reality. Not even 
sidered as a purely mechanical process. See th 
ject in "Fundamental Problems" (p. 115 et 

. there 

iformity of 



Mechanically Explained?" and 
Physics," lite Monist No. 3, p. 40] 

the lite of mankind is a 
:ural processes is only one side ; 
:n the fall of a stone can be con- 
he author's remarks on the sub- 
seqq.), "Can the World be 
cle " Some Questions of Psycho- 

dispensable for evolution to fulfil itself, the question 
is whether my soul will enter into the evolutionary 
movement, or to use a biblical term, whether I shall 
enter into life eternal, as an element representing an 
upward or as one representing a downward pull. To 
speak of a single individual as helping evolution is 
something like helping God in governing the world. 
The individual does not come into consideration at all 
from an ethical standpoint, but that alone which is 
represented in the individual. 

Mr. Goldwin Smith still recognises, particularly 
with regard to the gentler virtues, the influence of re- 
ligion upon our code of ethics. He says : 

" There is no saying how much of theism, or even of Chris- 
tianity, still mingles with the theories of agnostics. When the 
agnostic assumes that the claims of the community are superior to 
those of the individual, when he uses such a term as ' conscien- 
tious,' and even when h.e speaks with reverence of an 'eternal 
source of energy and force,' careful scrutiny of his expressions 
might discover a trace of theism." 

Certainly, there is a trace of theism in any kind of 
morality, even if the expression " the eternal source of 
energy " be rejected. We at least do most emphat- 
ically reject it as a dualistic and a meaningless phrase. 
Nevertheless, morality means obedience to some law 
higher, grander, and nobler than our individual in- 
terests. The recognition of the authority of this law 
is the kernel of all religion, it is also the truth con- 
tained in the idea of God. 

Mr. Goldwin Smith says : 

" The saying that if God did not exist it would be necessary 
to invent him, was very smart but very silly. Nothing can be done 
for us by figments. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it 
is necessary that he keep his allegiance to the truth." 

With this we perfectly agree. Nothing can be done 
for us by figments. But if all the nations that cease 
to believe in, and at the same time also cease to obey, 
the authority of the moral law, irredeemably go to the 
wall, can that moral law be considered as a figment ? 
We may consider the personification of the moral law 
as a figment, and we have good reason to do so, but 
if by God is understood that objective reality in the 
world which by the penalty of extinction enforces a 
certain kind of conduct, we may expect no serious 
contradiction when we maintain that the existence of 
God can be scientifically proved. 

It is a matter of course that the God of science is 
not like the God of the heathenish religions, not even 
like the good Lord of pagan Christianity who can be 
bribed by flattery and prayer, and still less like the 
benevolent and philanthropic God Father of Deism. He 
is an inflexible law, immutable, irrefragable, eternal ; 
stern toward transgressors and kind toward those who 
keep his commandments. If Mr. Goldwin Smith will 
consider God in this sense as a natural law, or rather 
as the law of nature, as that in nature which is as it 



is, in the Pentateuch called by the expressive name 
Javeh, as that which we cannot model at pleasure, but 
to which we must model ourselves in order to live and 
to continue to live — he will find that God is at the 
bottom of evolution also ; he will find that morality 
indeed can and must be educed from it. It is true 
that evolution proclaims as its law the survival of the 
fittest. But who in the long run of millenniums are 
the fittest if not those that conform to that stern author- 
ity, to the law of nature, to the order of the cosmos, to 
that all-power of which we are a part which has created 
us and still maintains our life, — to God. 

If Mr. Goldwin Smith means to say that ethics 
without religion is a failure and will remain a failure, 
we agree with him perfectly. He says : 

"With misgivings, conscious or unconscious, about religion, 
came the desire of finding a sanction for morality independent of 
theology ; in other words, moral philosophy." 

He adds that all those moral philosophers " whose 
philosophy has been practically effective, from So- 
crates downward, have been religious and have re- 
garded their philosophy as the ally and confirmation 
of religion." This, I grant, is true if religion is used 
in the broad sense we use it, and not in the sense of 
a creed' which declares that religiosity consists in a 
blind belief of traditional dogmas. 

Mr. Goldwin Smith quotes approvingly a passage 
from his late friend Mr. Cotter Morison, whom he 
calls "the most thorough-going of agnostics." Mr. 
Morison says : 

"Virtue may, and possibly will, bring happiness to the vir- 
tuous man ; but to the immoral and the selfish, virtue will probably 
be the most distasteful or even painful thing in their experience, 
while vice will give them unmitigated pleasure." 

This is true, and being true it suffices to explode 
z.ny kind of hedonism which would fain make us be- 
lieve that happiness is the consequence of virtue, and 
that virtue must be explained as that which gives 
pleasure or produces happiness. The quotation is 
valuable because it comes from an agnostic. Agnostics 
not being able to found ethics upon something which 
they do not know and which they consider as unknow- 
able, have attempted to explain morality as that which 
is conducive to happiness. If ethics cannot be de- 
duced from happiness or that which causes happiness, 
how can we explain it ? 

Mr. Goldwin Smith calls attention to the fact that 
all other attempts of teaching or explaining morality 
contain religious elements, and he is right. He says : 

"Where they take as their foundation the authority of con- 
science, the categorical imperative, or the command of nature, it 
is clear that they are still within the circle of theism." 

He adds these two propositions which, it appears, 
he believes to be equivalent : " Nature," he says, " is 
an unmeaning expression without an author of nature. 

or rather, it is a philosophical name of God." The 
former proposition we reject as a decided no)i sequitur; 
the latter we accept. As soon as we consider nature, 
the world-order, the laws of the evolution of life in 
their moral importance, we are confronted with the 
true kernel of religious truth ; their recognition is the 
kernel of the God idea, for God if it means anything 
is the moral authority whose will must be done. 

Agnosticism is an untenable and a practically use- 
less philosophy. Mr. Goldwin Smith says, "The pro- 
fession of safe acquiescence in ignorance may sound 
very philosophic." But it is not ; and he has our full 
assent when he says : 

"The generation after next may perhaps see agnosticism, 
moral as well as religious, tried on a clear field. By that time, 
possibly, science, whose kingdom seems now to have come, will 
have solved in her own way the mystery of Existence ; at least so 
far as to provide us with a rule of life, personal and social." 

We also believe that the kingdom of science seems 
now to have come. But if it comes, in what way and 
by whose authority does it come ? It comes in the or- 
dinary course of evolution by the authority of the God 
of the religion of science. It comes after all as a sur- 
vival of the fittest in spite of Mr. Goldwin Smith's 
denunciation of the law of evolution. This is so pal- 
pable that no words need be lost about it. Yet Mr. 
Goldwin Smith's argument is so strong that we shall 
have to add a few further explanations. 

Mr. Goldwin Smith says: 

"The tiger has been as much evolved as the lamb; and the 
most noxious of human beasts, if he can hold his own in the strug- 
gle for existence, at whatever expense to his fellows, has as good 
a right to existence as Socrates." 

Here we have to make two objections. 

First we have to repeat what we have said again 
and again on other occasions : that this famous com- 
parison so often employed to contrast the immoral 
evil-doer with the moral martyr does not correctly rep- 
resent the nature of the problem. The tiger is not 
more immoral than the lamb ; on the contrary, if the 
tiger represents the active energetic fighter who in the 
struggle for existence holds his own, while the lamb 
represents the passive sufferer who is too weak-headed 
to face his foe, the tiger is more moral than the lamb 
and it serves the lamb right that he succumbs to the 
victor. There is no morality in ovine indolence. Mor- 
ality is not, as it is often supposed to be, merely the 
omission of certain grosser or more refined crimes, of 
different sins, bad habits, and pecadilloes ; true mor- 
ality is not passive, it is active, it consists in the 
achieving and doing of that which is our duty to do 
for ourselves and for mankind, which latter is only a 
wider range of our nobler self. 

Our second objection to Mr. Goldwin Smith's argu- 
ment is that "human beasts" can not hold their own. 



They are constantly being eliminated by the natural 
selection of evolution. 

We agree with Mr. Goldwin Smith when he says : 
" It is absurd to say that a life of self-denial and en- 
durance, ending in martyrdom, is happiness" — for the 
law of morality cannot be educed from man's yearning 
for happiness — and in a certain sense we also agree 
to the clause he adds — "unless there is a compensa- 
tion beyond." Morality as a factor in life and in evo- 
lution, as a law of nature, cannot be understood unless 
we rise above the sphere of the individual. Egotism 
is not morality, and moral actions are those which are 
consciously or unconsciously performed with an out- 
look beyond the narrow interests of the individual in 
time and space. Moral motives are superindividual. 
I purposely do not call them altruistic, because altru- 
ism does not seem to me the proper moral view ; it 
simply replaces the interests of the own ego by those 
of other egos. The superindividual aspect however 
makes humanity and its ideals, the natural laws of 
social justice and the moral law of the world, parts of 
the individual and it is not the individual but these 
superindividual parts of his soul which will survive. 

Mr. Goldwin Smith is not yet free from the indi- 
vidualism of our time. He seems to expect that mor- 
ality and happiness shall be doled out to the individ- 
ual in equal proportions. He introduces the following 
instance : 

"A man acquires a great estate by fraud, enjoys it wisely, 
uses his wealth liberally, makes himself popular, takes good care 
of his health, lives long, dies respected, and leaves healthy off- 
spring. Freed by his opulence from wearing toil and injurious 
exposure, he exhibits all the energy, vivacity, and sociability which 
are held out as the rewards of a right course of living. Morality 
says that he is miserable, but how can evolution condemn him ?" 

Evolution does condemn him. Evolution will in 
the long run eliminate such types as he is, as certain 
as it will eliminate the tigers from off the surface of 
the earth. 

Mr. Goldwin Smith continues : 

' ' Evolutionary philosophers give excellent precepts for healthy 
and comfortable living ; but these precepts apparently the man 
fulfils, and thus he fulfils all righteousness. They may talk to 
him, indeed, of a more perfect state of society to be some day 
brought about by ethical science, in which he would be out of 
place; but he, having only one life, takes the world as he finds it, 
and makes the best of it for himself. Why should he sacrifice 
himself to the future of humanity ?" 

Why should he sacrifice himself for the future of 
humanity? Because the future of humanity is his 
own future. Why shall a boy sacrifice the hours of 
his childhood for the future days of his manhood ? 
Why ! Because the man is the continuance of the boy. 
The objection may be made that the comparison does 
not hold good; the future generations of mankind are 
not we ourselves, while the adult man is the same 
person as the boy. What, however, does "the same 

person" mean? The word "person" represents a 
history, a continuance, nothing more. Persons are 
not unchangeable units ; there is not one atom of the 
boy left in the man. Materially considered the adult 
man is as exactly as much and not more different from 
himself when he was a boy, as the present generations 
of mankind are different from the past generations, 
for in both instances the continuity is preserved in 
exactly the same degree and measure. 

It is said that a man "having only one life takes 
the world as he finds it, and makes the best of it for 
himself." The truth is man has not " oi>ly one life." 

" The soul that rises with us, our life's star, 
Hath had elsewhere its setting 
And Cometh from afar." 

Man's life, his humanity, does not consist of the 
material particles of his body. The properly human 
in man consists almost entirely of his relations with 
other men. His very language is superindividual, and 
if we could cut out the superindividual from his brain, 
there would remain a mere brute. How the superin- 
dividual naturally grows in man and how it will con- 
tinue to exist beyond the grave need not be again ex- 
plained.* There is a great truth in the idea of immor- 
tality, although there need not be an immortality either 
of bodily resurrection or in a purely spiritual heaven 

The immortality of the soul is a truth ; the immor- 
tality of the individual is an error. We must cease to 
consider the ego of the individual as a reality. It is 
no reality and the belief in it is an illusion ; it is the 
veil of Maya. The antiquated view of regarding the 
personality of a man as an entity, as a kind of mys- 
terious soul-unit, produces most intricate sham-prob- 
lems ; but these problems will disappear as soon as 
the veil of Maya has been lifted from our eyes. 

As soon as we lose sight of the truth that mankind 
is one great whole and that the individual is a man 
only in so far as mankind lives in him, we shall not be 
able to understand and to account for morality. The 
superindividual in man, whatever it may be called, is 
as much a reality as is the shape of his body, and it is 
the superindividual elements in man which constitute 
his soul. The recognition of the immortality of man's 
soul, not in the old sense, but in a scientific sense, will 
be found to be the only satisfactory solution of the 
ethical problem and at the same time of the religious 
problem. p. c. 



"General " Booth's plan for the redemption of the poor 

was the theme of debate at the Sunset Club on the 19th of March.' 

Two ministers of the gospel were (he chief debaters, one for 

" General " Booth, and one against him. The argument of the 

advocate who opened in the affirmative, was weakened by its mag- 

* See The Ethical Frobleni pp. 34 et seqq. and 44. 



niloquence. It was the effervescence of rhetoric. Every gallon 
of it contained three quarts cf sentimental froth ; about the right 
proportion in a pulpit exhortation to a lot of "miserable sinners," 
but rather too hysterical for the Sunset Club. There was also too 
much realistic detail in it, revelations of deeds done in the slums, 
hideous things which all men grieve about, but which it is in ques- 
tionable taste to describe in all their bare deformity. 

The first speaker, in analysing " Darkest England " into its 
component elements, very properly put physical infirmity among 
the chief causes of the evils exposed by " General " Booth, her- 
editary punishments, the sins of the fathers visited upon their chil- 
dren even unto the third and fourth generation. In describing 
those victims of heredity who constitute so large an element of 
"Darkest England," he said with pardonable bombast, "They 
were datnned into the cradle, instead of born into light life ; not 
landed into life, but shipwrecked into life." I have no disposition 
to quarrel with a literary style, when its phrases are so expressive 
and so true ; and here it was that the speaker made a good strong 
plea in vindication of Booth's plan. ' ' The first thing about it, " he 
said, "is this, that it tries to relieve physical discomfort, thus 
making ready for real and lasting reform." That is the broadest 
and best road out of " Darkest England," and if the plan of " Gen- 
eral " Booth only "tries" to open that road, it is worthy of all 
praise, whether its means are effectual or not. 

The ardent advocate of "General" Booth's plan asserted 
secondly, that it contemplated the intellectual improvement of the 
poor, and on this part of the subject he said, "Failure is always a 
species of ignorance " ; an opinion with a good deal of truth in it, 
and very well expressed. He also took high ground when he said 
"Any successful plan must include an intellectual element," but 
unfortunately he did not maintain himself there, for he completely 
failed to show any "intellectual element" in " General" Booth's 
plan. " An evening's entertainment and instruction" is altogether 
too indefinite and vague, for it may mean the delirious excitement 
and spiritual intoxication produced by the Salvation Army, shout- 
ing, psalra-singing, and beating tambourines and drums. Surely 
there is nothing " intellectual " or educational in that. 

And as a third reason for applauding " General " Booth, the 
speaker said, " His problem deals with a change of environment 
so far as the environment has produced the misery." Really this 
deserves approval if its meaning is to bring the ' ' submerged tenth " 
up out of the cellars in Tom All Alone's into brighter and more 
comfortable homes. This doubtless is the meaning of it, although 
disfigured somewhat by inelegant and ill-fitting metaphor. "In 
place of bad air and bad surroundings," pleaded the advocate, 
" give them sunshine, God's great scavenger, which searches out 
the least bit of filth." That is figurative but not poetical, and be- 
sides, it is otherwise vague, uncertain, and insufficient. " God's 
great scavenger" cannot work with much effect in " Darkest Eng- 
land " until the laws of England give more equal opportunities to 
all the English people. 

In addition to a change in the conditions, the advocate said 
that the plan of "General " Booth contemplated a change in the 
men also. "This plan," he said, "understands full well that if 
you save the man he will save his own circumstances. Not Para- 
dise itself can make a bad man good, Adam and Eve sinned in 
Paradise." This was a little inconsistent with the claim just pre- 
viously made, that the reformation was to come through a change 
in the physical circumstances which made the sin and misery, and 
of which the unfortunates in " Darkest England " were the crea- 
tures and the victims. Paradise will not make men good, but it 
will cure them of the diseases and the sins that come from poverty. 

A great many social wrongs and political errors have grown 
out of the theological mistake that Adam and Eve sinned in Para- 
dise. The fabulous command that put restraint upon their freedom 
was the sinner, and it was brave and virtuous in Adam and Eve 

to risk their lives for liberty. In this Paradise which we call 
Earth, there is not now and there never was any forbidden tree of 
knowledge ; nor any tree the fruit of which we may not eat if we 
can get it. To the most precious thing within this world of ours 
every man and every woman may aspire, and the aspiration itself 
is virtue. Any mandate that seeks to limit the knowledge of good 
and evil is void according to the highest and divinest law, the law 
of progress to perfection. We know very little as yet, but there is 
nothing we may not know. 

The learned counsel on the other side, as the lawyers have it, 
was a reverend iconoclast who toppled over the whole scheme of 
' ' General " Booth, and buried that famous commander in the ruins 
of it. For a minister of the gospel he was painfully logical ; he did 
neither gush nor glow, but went straight at his work with hammer 
and anvil like a blacksmith. In the debate he had a great advan- 
tage by reason of experimental knowledge of the subject gained in 
London ; and his testimony was like that of an expert. He spoke 
with contemptuous pity of ' ' General " Booth, whom he described as 
a man without any business ability, untruthful, and dishonest. " I 
have no great esteem for him," he said, " I know too much about 
him. But let me say this : There is a coiistruction of his charac- 
ter which is a charitable one. He knows no better. He has not 
those high ideas of honor and ethics which this problem needs." 
This estimate the speaker did not seek to prove by any thrilling 
figures of speech, but by information which appeared strong in the 
qualities of evidence. With vigorous, if not very classical, em- 
phasis, he remarked: "The confession that 'General' Booth is 
not a business man and not practical, damns the whole scheme." 

Further along, this critic had no hesitation in stigmatising the 
enterprise of "General" Booth as a mercenary scheme to enrich 
the Booth family, and he declared that the book which had appealed 
so strongly to the charity of England, " was founded largely on 
exaggeration and false statements." With sarcasm rough as a 
rasp, he said : " If you will take pains to notice you will see that 
every prominent office is in the Booth family. It is the lieuten- 
ants who starve." 

The despotic features of the scheme, and the imperialistic re- 
fusal of ' ' General Booth " to render any account of the fund placed 
in his hands, were exposed by the speaker and rightfully con- 
demned. Charitable funds placed in the hands of any man to be 
used as he thinks fit, and never to be accounted for, are dangerous 
enemies to honesty. Give them time enough and they will surely 
breed corruption. They have already made a social autocrat of 
"General" Booth, and he grows callous to public opinion. "The 
fact is," said his critic at the Sunset Club, " ' General ' Booth is at 
the end of his tether. He needs more money and enthusiasm. I 
hope no such infliction will visit Chicago as the endorsing of any 
religious society to make it a social despotism as Booth would 
have the Salvation Army made." 

I am sorry to see that the speaker threw contempt and ridicule 
upon what he called " the soup and salvation " plan of improving 
the condition of the poor. Perhaps it would be better to give the 
soup alone, but if the donors of the soup insist upon administering 
salvation with it, is it not better to accept the mixture rather than 
lose the soup ? There was high-grade political morality in the 
scorn of the speaker for any system of charity that weakens the 
spirit of men. He said : "Independence, manliness, firm nerves, 
and strong muscles, these are not gained through soup-kitchens 
and salvation-uniforms. These things are the product of toil and 
battle upon the hillside. These things are the problem of man 
facing the problem of his own destiny -wil/i what help his individ- 
ual felloiit-vian can gi''c him^ 

I have put the last part of that sentence in italics because in 
those words the problem lies. How much help is it wise to give, 
and how shall it be given ? The bounty of alms may sometimes 
encourage idleness, and the receipt of them weaken the moral 



nerve, by injuring self-respect ; but after all there is a class of 
unfortunates who are entitled to charity as of right, and there is a 
fortunate class who are bound as of right to give. When there 
are no privileged classes, when the opportunities of all are equal, 
when even the accidents of life are evenly shared, then it will be 
time enough to moralise on the vice of charity in preserving and 
perpetuating a dependent class. Charity, even in the form of 
alms, is one of the great civilising and humanising forces of the 
world, and the practice of it is to some people such a luxury that 
they would rather give to an impostor than not to give at all. It 
may be misapplied in many cases but let us not discourage it, 
there is no danger that we shall have a surplus of it for several 
years to come. 

After all, it may be a question whether "Darkest England" 
is over there in the East of London in the " Vitechapel" neigh- 
borhood, or West of Buckingham palace in Belgravia, where the 
Dukes, and Earls, and the Feudal Barons live. These conquered 
the English at Hastings, and have held them in subjection ever 
since. They have appropriated the land, mines, forests, and all 
the natural opportunities of the English people, and before the 
conquered can use any of them they must pay tribute of rent in 
some form or other to the conquerors. In that city of palaces ly- 
ing south of Hyde Park, where an idle aristocracy squanders in 
luxury the spoils of the English, there is "Darkest England." 


Moncure D. Conway who is so well known to our readers by 
his excellent contributions to TIic Open Court has contributed an 
interesting article to the April number of 'J'lu' Ci-ii/iiry on "Wash- 
ington and Frederick the Great " from which we quote the follow- 
ing episode : " When John Brown went to conquer the South with 
twenty three men he believed that the less he trusted arms of flesh 
the more Jehovah might be depended on to unsheathe his sword. 
The only other sword Brown considered worthy to be used by the 
Almighty was that which Washington was said to have received 
from Frederick the Great. One of Brown's men (Cook) came as 
a spy to Bel Air, and was hospitably shown the Washington relics 
for which he inquired. Brown told Colonel Washington, after 
taking him prisoner, that he wished to get hold of the sword 'be- 
cause it has been used by two successful generals.' The supersti- 
tion cost him dear. In order to get the sword Brown detached six 
of his men to go after it — five miles away. He thus lost half a 
day, and all chance of escape. Seventeen lives were offered as on 
an altar before this mythical sword." 






157 Page 

75 Cents. Cloth. 

A portion of this intensely interesting monograph was published in the 
columns o£ Tlie Open Court. Although of the highest critical and analytic 
character, and containing advanced and original views, M. Ribot's book 
forms an excellent introduction into the study of modern psychology, treating 
of its central and fundamental problem— that of the personality, the ego. 


169-175 La Salle Street, Chicago, Illinois. 





The Factors of Evolution. By JOSEPH LE CONTE. 

The Physiognomy of the Anarchists. By PROF. CESARE LOMBROSO. 


The Question of Duality of Mind. By R. M. BACHE. 

Immortality. By DR. G. M. GOULD. 

Some Questions of Psycho-Physics. A Discussion: (i) Sensations and the 

Elements of Reality, by PROF. ERNST MACH ; (2) Feelings and the 

Elements of Feeling, by DR PAUL CARUS. 
European Correspondence. 

1) France— ARREAT. 

2) Italy— LOMBROSO. 

Book Reviews : Taylor's Origin of the Aryans: Harris's Introduction to Phi- 
losophy: Geddes's and Thom^fson's Evolution 0/ Sex: Morgan's y4«»«a/ 
Life and Intelligence : Mantesazza's Physiognomy and Expression: Booth's 
In Darkest England : Carus Sterne's Allgemeirte \Veltanscha%iung iti ihrer 
historischen Enixvickelung: and Post's Allgemeine Rechtsivisse^ischaft . 

Periodicals: Epitomes and critical reviews of the contents of A/Zwrf, Inter- 
national yournal 0/ Ethics, Revue Philosophique, ZHtschriftfiir Psychologie 
vnd Physiologic der Sinnesorgane, Schriften der Gesellschaft fiir psycho- 
logische Forschiing, Philosophische Monatshefte, Mine?-va (Italian), Voprosy 
filoso/ii i psichologii (Russian). 


Terms of Subscription : 52.00 a year, postpaid, to any part of the United 
States, Canada, and Mexico ; to foreign countries in the Postal Union, $2.25 : 
lingle numbers, 60 cents; postpaid to New South Wales, Victoria, Queens- 
and, Tasmania, S2.50 a year. 



LONDON: Messrs. Watts &= Co., 

IJ yoliiisoK's Court, Ftect Street, E. C. 




Sj.oo per year. • $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

TxaiJE: o^E::tT coxjjrt, 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 





LIGION. Editor 2765 


Gen. M. M. Trumbull 2768 

NOTES 2770 





The Open Court 


Devoted to the \A^ork of Conciliating Religion AA^ith. Science. 

No. 190. (Vol. V.-i 

CHICAGO, APRIL 16, 1891. 


Among the conceptions of God there are three 
which have been and are still the most prevalent and 
powerful ; these three are Theism, Pantheism, and 

The Theist anthropomorphises that power which 
he recognises as the authority of moral conduct, and 
looks upon it as a stern ruler or a kind father. If evils 
appear as the consequence of vice, he says : These are 
God's visitations ! And he thinks of God as teaching 
his creatures his will and enforcing his obedience, not 
by making the contrary absolutely impossible, but like 
a wise educator raising children in liberty, allowing 
them to make mistakes so as to learn by their own 

Theism is not wrong if we keep before us the fact 
that the personality of God is an allegory ; and it 
must be granted that it is the best allegory we can 
discover. There is a world-order manifesting itself 
to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. We 
have to conform to it and there is no escape from it. 
It is omnipresent, like all natural laws ; like gravita- 
tion it is everywhere, it is bound up in all existence, 
being that something that encompasseth all our life. 

In describing this omnipresence of God, the 
psalmist says : 

Whither shall I go from thy spirit ? or whither shall I flee 
from thy presence ? 

If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there : if I make my bed 
in hell, behold thou art there. 

If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost 
parts of the sea, 

Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall 
hold me. 

There has been made, so long as Christianity ex- 
ists and even longer, a strong opposition to the idea 
that God is, like man, an individual being, having at 
different times different passions and desires. The 
Old Testament contains the well-known passage : 
" God is not a man that he should lie ; neither the son 
of man that he should repent." 

God is as little a person as are the ideas of Good- 
ness, Beauty, and Truth ; and the passages of the Bi- 
ble in which God is described as wroth or repenting, 
or as being subject to any emotion or sentiment of a 
human character, have been understood since they 
were written, by rabbis no less than by the fathers of 

the Church, in an allegorical sense, which was not 
only appropriate because of the strength and express- 
iveness of the simile, but because it was also the lan- 
guage of the time. To speak or think of spiritual things 
otherwise than in the habits of the times would be 
equivalent to expecting that the author of Genesis 
should have known Darwin's origin of the species and 
all the details of natural history when he described in 
great poetical outlines the formation of the world and 
the origin of man out of the dust of the earth. 

The dogmatic view that God is a person and must 
be considered as a person became finally established 
as the orthodox view of the Church during the second 
and third century after Christ, and in this way all 
other views were branded as atheism. But who gave to 
a few narrow-minded bishops and to the theologians of 
a special school the right to impose this interpretation 
of the Bible upon all mankind ? Who gave the right 
to Athanasius to pronounce as an oecumenical con- 
fession of faith the Quicunque vult salvus esse, i. e. 
"No one can be saved except he believe as is here 
prescribed." Living the truth can save alone. But 
the truth cannot be pronounced on the motion of a 
bishop by the majority decision of an ecclesiastic 
council. The truth must be searched for," it must be 
established by careful observation and critique, it 
must be proved. 

We are willing to recognise the truth wherever 
we find it, even in the errors of the past ; we will pa- 
tiently winnow all opinions and creeds, lest we throw 
away the wheat together with the useless chaff. But 
with all that, we do not intend to compromise with 
superstitions sanctified by traditions. If Athanasius's 
view of God and other religious conceptions are to be 
regarded as infallible truth too sacred for criticism and 
required to be accepted blindly, we shall openly and 
squarely side with atheism and denounce the belief in 
God as a superstition. 

Atheism is right in the face of dogma and dog- 
matic theism. There is no person ruling the world; 
all the processes of nature take place with an intrinsic 
necessity according to the life that is in everything 
that exists. The whole world is one great cosmos 
pervaded by unalterable law. 

But was the idea of God not something more than 
a belief in a huge person? Is it possible that an 



enormous error swayed the intellectual development 
of humanity for millenniums? The strength of the 
God idea was not its error but its truth, and its truth 
is contained in the fact, that in spite of the advantages 
which sin, malevolence, iniquity, falsehood, and disre- 
gard of the rights of others seem to bring the evil-doer, 
humanity still believed in the final victory of justice 
and the triumph of truth. And this one feature in 
the idea of God was predominant whenever and wher- 
ever it exercised a moral influence over the minds of 
men. It gave them strength in temptation, hope in 
affliction, and confidence in tribulation. And shall we 
relinquish this treasure because it was alloyed with 
error? Shall we drop with the personality of God all 
the moral truth which the idea contains ? 
Schiller says : 

" One God exists, one holy will, 
While fickle man may waver. 
Above time and space there liveth still 
The highest idea forever." 

If, then, God is no person, if God is consid- 
ered as the All in All, if Nature alone is God, is not 
the latter view nearer the truth than theism ? This 
view which identifies God and the world is called 
Pantheism, and it cannot be denied that in the face 
of the theistic view, pantheism is a deeper and more 
correct conception of God. Nevertheless, Pantheism 
has also its blind side, and most of its defenders are 
entangled in gross errors. 

It is true that the idea of a personal God outside of 
the world and nature is not tenable ; yet the idea of 
God and the idea of nature are not identical. God is 
nature in so far only as nature serves us as a regulative 
principle for our actions. God is the cosmos in so far 
only as its -laws represent the ultimate authority of 
moral conduct. God is not the heat of the sun, not 
the rain that descends from the clouds; he is not the 
blossom of the tree, nor the ear of wheat in the field. 
The idea of God is a special abstraction, different from 
other abstractions, and it should not be confounded 
with them. Pantheism recognising the truth that there 
is no God outside of the universe, preposterously con- 
founds God and the universe and thus leads to the 
confusion of a God-Nature, in which there is no wrong, 
no sin, no evil. 

It has been said, and it is true, that the weakness of 
Pantheism is its inability to explain the evil of the world. 
If the All is in every respect absolutely identical with 
God, there is no evil :' if everything is a part of God, its 
existence whatever it be, even the existence of evil, is 
sanctified by being divine. There would be no wrong, 
but there would be no right either. The morally bad 
would disappear together with that which is morally 
good, and the whole would appear as an absolutely in- 
different and meaningless play of physical forces. 

Does this state of things really represent life as it 

is ? Are there no ideals, no aspirations ? Is there no 
direction, no goal, no aim in the evolution of life and 
in the development of mankind ? Surely there is 
good and bad, there is right and wrong, there is health 
and sickness, there is prosperity and ruin, evolution 
and dissolution, building up and breaking down ; there 
is heaven and hell in human hearts, there is God — and 
the devil. The world as it is is possible only in these 
contraries, in these oppositions, and its life is a con- 
stant struggle between Ormuzd and Ahriman. 

It is a vain dream to think of a world which is good 
throughout. We can as little think of light that casts 
no shadow as of "good" without being the resistance 
to "evil," or without standing in a contrast to "bad." 

Christ said : 

" Woe unto the world because of offences ! For it must needs 
be that offences come ; but woe to that man by whom the offence 

The Talmud contains a legend that the rabbis had 
once succeeded in catching the devil and keeping him 
confined, when lo ! the whole world came to a stand- 
still. Everybody went to sleep and all life ceased. 
Suppose it were possible that a world existed without 
any evil, it would be a world without anj' opposites, 
it would be a world of indifferent homogeneity, with- _ 
out aim, without direction, without interests. If there 
were at all in an absolutely good world a play of forces 
evolution would be as good as dissolution, progress 
would be equivalent to retrogression, and the cosmos 
would be a machine which might be turned backward 
just as well as forward. 

Could you have a thermometer which indicates the 
heat only and not the cold at the same time ? Good 
and evil are relations which are deeply founded in the 
nature of things. These relations arise through the 
very complications of life. To identif3' God and the 
All, to understand by God the upward direction just 
as much as the downward direction of evolution, is the 
same mistake as to identify the concepts heat and tem- 
perature. It is true that the same degree of the ther- 
mometer may now be perceived as heat and now as 
cold. Heat and cold are not two things mixed in our 
temperature; they are one. So are good and evil. 
Nevertheless there is a difference in the rising and the 
falling of the thermometer. There is a difference of 
heat and cold. This difference is relative and it dis- 
appears as soon as we leave the sphere of relations 
and consider either a single moment in its unrelated 
isolation or the total whole in its absolute entirety. A 
single act in my life if it remained unrelated and iso- 
lated could be called neither good nor evil. There is 
no absolute evil ; nor is there any absolute cold. An 
isolated act would be like a certain position of the 
thermometer of which we do not know whether it rep- 
resents a rise or a fall. It becomes hot or cold not 



until it is referred to another state of temperature. 
And there is no sense either in speaking of the morahty 
or immoralit}' of the All in its absolute totality. 

That which appears to us from our standpoint as evil 
— and I do not deny that, considered in this relation, it 
is actually and undeniably evil — appears if considered 
in the whole as a part of the total development of uni- 
versal life, as a transitional and a necessary phase 
only. It is a partial breakdown, but it is no absolute 

The evil in the world is comparable to the negative 
magnitudes and quantities in arithmetic. There are 
no negative things in the world ; but there are nega- 
tive magnitudes in arithmetic. They represent a con- 
trary direction to that which has been posited. . The 
minus is a positive operation, but this operation is 
employed to reverse a plus of equal magnitude. The 
plus and minus operations have sense and meaning 
only if considered in their mutual relation. This re- 
lation being neglected we have only single operations 
or the results of operations, but neither positive nor 
negative magnitudes. If the impossibilit}' could be 
thought, that there are no interconnections among the 
parts of the whole cosmos, we should have neither 
bad nor good, but only isolated actual existences. 

Consider the whole world as a whole and destruc- 
tion disappears as much as new creations. There are, 
so far as we can see, only actual existences which 
move onward somehow in some direction. That which 
appears to us as a dissolution, as a destruction, is in the 
motion of the whole a mere preparation for a new gen- 
eration. The breakdown of a solar system must appear 
only as an evil, as a negative operation in comparison 
to the positive operation of a building up. But in the 
.entire cosmic life it will most likely be the indispen- 
sable preliminary phase of the construction of a new 
world. In the entire cosmic life, there is no evil, there 
is the progress of formation on the one hand and there 
is on the other hand the dissolution of those combina- 
tions which have become unfit for a continued exist- 
ence. They must be dissolved in order to be prepared 
for new formations; and thus their dissolution may 
be considered as a blessing, as much as the curses 
that rest upon sin, if viewed as integral parts of the 
whole world-order, are not inflictions; they are as much 
blessings as the gains that accompany noble deeds. 

In this sense we may say that God is everywhere 
in nature, he is in evolution, he is in dissolution, he 
will be found in the storm; he will be found in the 
calm. He lives in the bliss of good aspirations and in 
the visitations that follow evil actions. He lives in 
the growth of life and in its decay. God is not the 
storm, he is not the calm, he is not the decay of life, 
he is not dissolution. He is not the bliss of virtue, 
nor is he the curse of sin. But he is in them all. 

In contradistinction to Theism, Atheism, and espe- 
cially to Pantheism, we call this conception of God 

God is the indestructible sursu/n, which ensouls 
everything that exists, which constitutes the direction 
of evolution and the growth of life, which is the truth 
in the empire of spiritual existence. It is an actu- 
ality, no less than matter and energy ; and indeed 
like these two, which represent as it were God's re- 
ality as well as his power and omnipotence, it cannot 
be lost in all the changes that take place in the con- 
stant formation, dissolution, and re-formation of solar 
systems. It is eternal, and it is in him we live and 
and move and have our being. 



A writer in the Atlantic Monthly* has said : "Magic 
had its beginning in devil-worship." Than this noth- 
ing could be more plain, but can anything be more 
false ? There have been all sorts of guesses about the 
origin of magic. Pomponazzi's attempt to explain the 
phenomena of magic by the influence of the stars, f is 
no worse than the modern attempt to find the beginning 
of magic in devil-worship. 

Here, let us follow if we can, from the beginning 
to the end, the magical idea that man has power over 
the supernatural. This brings up the main elements 
of savage philosophy which, as Major Powell says, 
"is the result of man's struggle to know."\ Or, as 
Mr. Tylor puts it : " Man's craving to know the causes 
at work in each event he witnesses, the reasons why 
each state of things he surveys is such as it is and no 
other is no product of high civilisation, but a charac- 
teristic of his race down to its lowest stages." § 

Bearing in mind the savage mental status already 
described, we find that the phenomena of the outside 
world are all explained on supernatural principles. 
"The Hurons," says Charlevoix, "attribute the most 
ordinary effects to supernatural causes." What is the 
savage theory of causation? Man's " first explana- 
tions," says Mr. Powell, "were based on analogies with 
phenomena of his own existence subjectively inter- 

An example or two may serve to explain more 
clearly the difference in the philosophies of uncultured 
and civilised men. The Rev. Francis Newman was 
going on a distant journey in the wilds of Asia. The 
natives tied around the neck of the mule a small bag 
supposed to have great magical virtue. Mr. Newman 
thought it a good opportunity to disprove a supersti- 

* For May. 1S82. 

t Lecky's Rationalism in Europe, Vol. I, p. 284. 

X Trans. Anthrop. Soc. Vol. II, p. 205. 

g Primitive Culture, I, p. 369. 



tious notion ; so he cut off the bag. "But as ill-for- 
tune would have it, the mule had not gone 30 yards 
up the street before she put her foot into a hole and 
broke her leg. " Of course all the natives were cqn- 
firmed in their magical faith. They said with some 
satisfaction: "Now you see what happens to unbe- 
lievers !" Again, the arrival of the Jesuit missionaries 
among the Hurons was followed by, or coincident 
with, certain misfortune to the tribe. The Hurons 
were satisfied, for instance, that Father Charlevoix's 
clock brought bad luck; that his weather-cock brought 
bad weather, and so forth. 

It is easy now to see how the savage philosophy of 
causation is at the bottom of magic. At the outset, 
we find that supernatural causes are assumed to pro- 
duce the most ordinary and natural effects. Can man 
work supernaturally ? Of course he can, and that be- 
lief finds continual expression in art magic. 

Once more, according to savage philosophy, an- 
tecedence and conse-quence in time stand in the relation 
of cause and effect. The Egyptians reasoned in that 
way; "for when aught prodigious occurs," says He- 
rodotus, " they keep good watch and write down what 
follows ; and then, if anything like the prodigy be re- 
peated, they expect the same events to follow as be- 
fore." Mr. Lang, who has worked out this portion of 
the subject, says : "We see the same confusion be- 
tween antecedence and consequence in time on one 
side, and cause and effect on the other, when the Red 
Indians aver that birds actually bring winds and storms, 
or fair weather." 

To recapitulate ; the general principles which un- 
derlie all magical reasoning are : 

I. That like affects, influences and suggests like. 
II. That natural effects are the results of super- 
natural causes ; that coincidence stands for cause. 

III. That antecedence and consequence in time 
are the same as cause and effect. Post hoc, ergo propter 

VI. That certain people, "not in the role of com- 
mon mortals," ire in communication with spiritual 
powers, which are obedient to their will. 
• No study of the natural history of magic would be 
complete without some account of the practical ap- 
plication of magical reasoning to the wants and de- 
mands of every-day life. For, what makes magic 
magical, in the ordinary sense of the word, is the 
putting of wild, absurd and illogical ideas into daily 
practice. Now, the semi-cultured man means to be 
extremely practical. He uses magic in song, in dance, 
and in medicine for definite practical purposes. His 
magical arts are not pour P art, but because they are 
useful to him. If the savage wishes to shoot game, 
to injure an enemy, to drive away evil spirits, or to 
recover from a fit of sickness, he goes about to ac- 

complish his purposes in what he thinks to be the most 
practical way. Any notion that savage magic is not 
practical will be dispelled by a study of the beliefs 
and practices which are always used in a low stage of 
culture. As an illustration, we may mention that in 
the Pacific Islands charms are hung up to keep thieves 
out of the cultivated plots ; a few cocoa-nut leaves 
plaited in the form of a shark will cause the thief who 
disregards it to be eaten by a real one; two sticks set 
one across the other will send a pain right across his 
body. * 

Again, the savage verily believes that his medi- 
cine-men or Shamans can work for him practical re- 
sults. He thinks, as we have seen, that human power 
will and can work supernaturally. On this belief, as 
Mr. Lang observes, "on this belief in man's power to 
affect events beyond the limits of natural possibility is 
based the whole theory of magic, the whole power of 
sorcerers." As a natural result of this belief, the 
doctor-wizard is the most practical man in the tribe. 
He can bring health, wealth and prosperity. When 
Mr. Turner was in Polynesia, he was disturbed night 
after night by the melancholy beating of shells, en- 
treating the wizards to stop plaguing their victims. 

Once more, the savage is a firm believer in the 
power of songs and incantations. He uses this kind 
of magic to drive evil spirits away, just as David 
drove the evil demon from Saul by his song and harp 
playing. The belief in the magical power of songs 
and incantations is found all over the world. It is a 
prominent feature in all magic, whether ancient or 
modern. Many of these magical songs are preserved 
in ritual ; many survive in marchen or household tales. 

In addition to these forms of magic, we find among 
savages the belief in the power of charms, and in a 
kind of "luck." Sticks and stones are no longer 
worshipped, but they are endowed with certain mag- 
ical properties, chiefly in the way of charms. But 
why is any stick or stone lucky? That is not always 
easy to say. Somehow particular objects are believed 
to bring success, and, to the mind of the semi-cul- 
tured man, that is enough to make them "lucky." 
Just as the Indian hunter wears the claws of the griz- 
zly bear that he may be endowed with its courage and 
ferocity, so he carries a bit of stone, perhaps, "for 
luck." As, even in our own day, there are people 
who carry a bent nail, a potato, a button, and so forth, 
"just for luck," you know. 

Thus, there are three forms of magic which spe- 
cially call for our attention. The}', are (i) the magic 
of the Shaman, (2) the magic of songs and incanta- 
tions and (3) the magic of charms and of luck. 

I. To understand the magic of the Shaman it is 
necessary to show how he comes by his miraculous 

* Tyler, "Early History," p. 130, 



powers. It has now to be shown what claims the 
Shaman has to be considered as a magician. Let us 
see how he goes to work. A good example is given 
by Mr. Dall.* He thus describes the methods in 
vogue among the Alaskans: "When the young as- 
pirant for the position of medicine-man goes out into 
the woods, after fasting for a considerable period, in 
order that his to be familiar spirit may seek him, and 
that he may become possessed of the power to com- 
municate with supernatural beings, if successful, he 
meets with a river otter, which is a supernatural ani- 
mal." He kills the otter, and "takes out the tongue, 
after which he is able to understand the language of 
all inanimate objects, of birds, animals and all other 
living creatures. He preserves the otter's tongue 
with the utmost care in a little bag around his neck." 
It is a " far cry " from Alaska to Australia, but the 
methods by which the medicine- man gains his magic 
is pretty much the same the world over. In Austra- 
lia, according to Mr. Howitt, "the manner in which 
a man became a Bira-ark (wizard) was generally be- 
lieved to be that being found alone in the forest by the 
Mrarts (ghosts), they took him up with them, and 
taught him."f 

The belief that the magician of the tribe can com- 
municate with the spirits is universal among savages. 
Thus, Mr. Brough Smyth mentions a case in which the 
wizard lying on his stomach spoke to the deceased, 
and the other sitting by his side received the mes- 
sage which the dead man told. J 

Now, the arts of the magician would be in vain 
unless he possessed power over the spirits with which 
he claims to be in communication. The savage really 
believes that the wizard of the tribe has this super- 
natural power. Thus, in an Ojibwa pictograph given 
by Schoolcraft, power corresponds with the sign for 
medicine-man or doctor. Garrick Mallery in his valu- 
able study of gesture language gives the sign for med- 
icine-man as follows: "Passing the extended and 
separated index and second fingers of the right hand 
upward from the forehead, spirally," indicates supe- 
rior knowledge. § He also gives another sign thus: 
"The hand passed upward before the forehead with 
the index finger loosely extended with the sign for 
sky," means knowledge of superior matters — spiritual 

Here let us distinguish between the magician 
proper and the medicine-man. The line has been 
drawn by Mr. Schoolcraft. He says : " The Meda is 
a magician. He is the professor of the arts of the 
Grand Medicine Dance. He makes use of various 
articles which are supposed to have the power of cur- 

* Repl. Bur. Ethn., 1881-2, pp. 111-112. 
t Journ. Anth. Inst , vol. 13, p. 185. 
X Aborigines of Australia, i, p. 107. 
S First An. Rept. Bureau Eth., p. 380. 

ing the sick. . . . He is, however, professedly a magi- 
cian. The power imparted to his medicines and charms 
is ascribed to necromancy. . . . The only use he makes 
of medicine is one wholly connected with the doctrine 
of magic. He is a seer, a soothsayer, a fortune- 
teller, a diviner and a prophet." * 

Here, again, we come to the medicine practice of 
the savage. As we have seen, disease is attributed to 
evil spirits ; the question being, not, How did the 
man die, but Who killed him ? Now, the remedies 
of the savage are wholly magical. It is the business 
of the medicine-man to drive out the evil spirit; in 
other words, to practice his magical art. This is a 
feature of magic which calls for some illustration. 

An excellent summary of the attributes of the Mo- 
jave doctor-wizard is given by Capt. John G. Bourke 
of the U. S. Army : " Mojave doctors are born, not 
trained. Their gifts are supernatural, not acquired. 
They can talk to the spirits before they have left their 
mother's womb. There are spirit doctors who are 
clairvoyants and exorcists ; they talk to spirits. There 
are snake doctors who cure snake bites ; sometimes 
by suction, sometimes by rubbing something on the 
wound, but generally by singing, "f 

Our idea of the medical practice of people in a low 
stage of culture is confirmed by Mr. James Morney's 
account of Cherokee theory and practice of medicine. J 
Thus, "plants are selected from some connection be- 
tween their appearance and the symptoms of the dis- 
ease. " Here we find again the ' ' like to like " theory ; 
that you can cure a man by applying a plant of 
the color of the symptoms, etc. Among the Chero- 
kees, biliousness is treated " with a decoction of sev- 
eral plants also called Da Idni, from the color of the 
root, flower or bark." So, too, in treating for a snake 
bite, the doctor rubs his finger around the spot from 
left to right, "because the snake always coils from 
right to left." 

Mr. Mooney proceeds : " The Cherokee doctor 
works to drive out a ghost or devil." Again, "every 
doctor is a priest, and every application is a religious 
act accompanied by a prayer. In these prayers the 
doctor first endeavors to show his contempt for the 
disease spirit by belittling it as much as possible, so 
as to conve}' the impression that he is not afraid of it." 

Now observe how the Cherokee doctor goes to work 
to cure the patient. " Sometimes the medicine is 
blown from the mouth of the doctor upon the body of 
the patient, according to certain rules. ... In every 
instance a prayer or sacred w«^ accompanies the ap- 

[to be concluded.] 

* Indian Tribes of U. S., edited by Dralie, Vol. I, p. 73. 
t Journal of Am. F. L., vol. 2, p. 172. 
t lourn. Am. F. L.. vol, 3, p. 47. 





The chief topic of the time is the controversy between the 
United States and Italy. The cause of the dispute is the tragedy 
at New Orleans, and the difficulties of it grow out of the unsettled 
state of international politics and law. How far was Italy as a na- 
tion injured by the action of the mob at New Orleans; and what 
legal power has the United States to grant redress, either by pun- 
ishing the actors in the drama, or by making compensation in 
money to the families of the victims ? As to the character of the 
killing, after admitting all the provocation claimed for it, there still 
remains upon the heart and mind the painful feeling that it was 
an act of sanguinary vengeance intensified by race prejudice, an 
Apache execution, irrational and barbarous. The victory of eleven 
hundred armed men over eleven men unarmed and in prison is an 
achievement not great in chivalry. If Italy has any standing in 
an international court at all, the evidence and the argument are 
largely on her side, but the right of that country to interfere for 
the victims of the riot may fairly be disputed, since they had in 
reality ceased to be citizens of Italy. 

What standing has Italy in the court ? It is claimed that four 
of the men slain in prison were Italian subjects, having never as- 
sumed the obligations nor sought the protection of naturalization 
in America. This raises the question, how far a man may claim 
the protection of two governments while acknowledging service to 
neither. Those four men had renounced their allegiance to Italy 
by the substantial act of abandoning that country to become per- 
manent residents of the United States. They could claim American 
protection for their property and their persons ; but when re- 
quired to serve on a jury, or in the army, or the militia, or to vote, 
or to perform any other duty belonging to citizenship, they in- 
stantly became exempt, and under the protection of Italy. In the 
same way, if required by the Italian government to render any 
duties to Italy, they could laugh at the demand, and place them- 
selves under the protection of the United States. 

Thousands of men of all sorts of nationalities choose to live 
in the United States claiming the protection of two countries with- 
out owning responsibility to either. Those four men who are the 
subjects of this international controversy were as much outside 
the political pale of Italy as if they had been born in Louisiana, 
or as the other seven who had formally taken the oath of alle- 
giance to the United States. The treaty stipulations by which it is 
agreed that Americans shall be protected in Italy, and Italians in 
America, apply only to those who are in good faith foreigners, 
transitory persons having a temporary residence either for busi- 
ness purposes or pleasure ; it has no application to permanent 
residents, whether they call themselve aliens, denizens, or citizens. 
Voluntarily those four men had withdrawn themselves from the 
guardianship of Italy, and that country might very properly have 
treated them as no longer a part of the Italian people. The United 
States might also take the same ground and insist upon it that by 
their own action they had renounced Italy and had become a part of 
the American people, but unfortunately the United States is on 
record against that principle. 

Whether the position just assumed is correct or not, the United 
States is estopped from taking it. We have pressed the immunity 
and impunity of American citizenship to unreasonable extremes, 
and we have been more ostentatious than any other nation in 
wrapping our flag around criminals in foreign countries, under the 
plea, sometimes true and sometimes not, that at some previous pe- 
riod they had become naturalized American citizens. Only a few 
years ago a member of a Dublin "Mafia " who had been appointed 
to murder an informer, having deliberately and effectually per- 
formed the work, was tried for the crime, found guilty, and sen- 
tenced to be hanged. There was no doubt about his guilt, yet the 

government of the United States, on the unsupported claim that 
he had taken out his first papers, requested the government of 
Great Britain to arrest the sentence against the murderer. Not 
only that, but Congress passed a resolution asking a respite for the 
criminal, that matters might be shown which would entitle him to 
a new trial. Out of respect for the American government a res- 
pite was granted, but nothing was shown, or could be shown in 
favor of a new trial and the man was finally hanged. This is only 
one specimen of our interference with the laws against offenders 
in foreign countries under the pretense that the criminals were 
nominally citizens of the United States. 

When Italy, out of regard for the safety of Italians in America, 
and in vindication of her own dignity, appeals to the treaty for 
atonement, we are compelled to plead that the security for our 
citizens which we have exacted from other nations we are not able 
to give to their citizens in return ; that literally we are a nation 
without sovereign powers in our own territory, and that the ques- 
tion of retribution belongs exclusively to the State of Louisiana 
a State which politically Italy does not know, a State which is for- 
bidden by the American constitution to have any political rela- 
tions with Italy, either by treaty, or in any other way. We are 
very impatient because the Italian government does not seem to 
understand this curious anomaly ; but let us imagine eleven Amer- 
icans in Genoa, accused of crime, tried by an Italian jury and ac- 
quitted, immediately put to death in prison by the " leading citi- 
zens " of the town ; would we not regard with surprise and scorn 
a plea of the Italian king that by the constitution of United Italy 
the national government had no criminal jurisdiction in Genoa. 
We should very promptly say that Italy could not plead its own 
constitution as an acquittal of its obligations to other nations. 

It is hardly necessary to say that the plea of justification 
offered in this case would be demurred out of any international 
court in Christendom as not binding upon Italy. The charge that 
the murdered Italians were themselves the murderers of Hennessy 
was answered by the verdict of the jury, and in this controversy 
that verdict is conclusive on I lie side of Italy; that the jury was 
bribed and all the rest of it, is mere assertion without any legal 
evidence to support it ; and even if all the excuses be admitted, 
the fact remains that the victims were Italians, confined in an 
American prison, and that they were illegally put to death by a 
mob, with at least the passive sanction of the mayor and other 
magistrates of New Orleans. As to the complaint that the Italian 
government has been rash and hasty in recalling the Italian am- 
bassador from Washington, let us imagine again the case of eleven 
Americans illegally put to death in Genoa, and how long would it 
take us to withdraw our minister from Italy ? 

As to menaces, we heed them not ; the United States is war- 
proof ; but a nation too powerful to fear war ought to be too mag- 
nanimous to desire it. The tone of the Jingo press is not a true 
echo from the conscience of our people, although it might lead 
foreigners to suspect that we aspire to be the swaggering cowboy 
among the nations. Our very invincibility ought to make us just 
and kindly considerate, yet some of our papers appear to be edited 
by Captain Bobadil, they are so full of challenge and conceit. 
Especially sensitive in our own intercourse with foreign countries 
we sometimes forget that other people have national spirit and 
some patriotic feeling. Several years ago one of our most in- 
tensely American journalists, in an article criticising the conduct 
of our ambassadors to foreign courts, asked this question, " Is the 
United States a gentleman ? " a very pertinent sarcasm, for the 
rules of good behavior apply to nations as to men. We may rudely 
defy the opinion of the outside world, but we cannot hide from our 
inner consciousness that the unfortunate affair at New Orleans 
has lowered us in our own esteem. 

There ought to be magnanimity on both sides. The Italian 
government should consider the vast foreign population perma- 



nently residing in the United States, and how impossible and un- 
reasonable it would be to hold the government o£ this country 
answerable to all the nations of the earth respectively for what- 
ever injuries may be inflicted here upon their former subjects. A 
very slight change of circumstances would reverse the [Josition of 
the parties to this cause, making the United States plaintiff, and 
Italy defendant. Suppose, for instance, the men slain at New 
Orleans had gone back to their native land a couple of years ago, 
to live there for the rest of their lives, and suppose them claiming 
to be American citizens, appealing to the United States to redress 
wrongs done them in Italy, we might at this very moment be de- 
manding reparation from Italy on their account, as Italy is de- 
manding it from us. Such are the anomalies that result from 
straining beyond its legitimate province the privilege acquired by 

all, these em 
anything of the matter ? 
unproved hypothesis ? h 
for surely this is implied 

Why do they tend 
ter ? Is not this « 


to congregate, and how do we kno 
hole theory, therefore, built upon j 
V that life is only a mode of energy ? 


While glancing over some of the reviews of ' ' The Soul of 
Man," I was astonished to find the book characterised as repre- 
senting materialism, or mechanical positivism, or mechanical mon- 
ism. It is strange how people can read into a book the ideas 
which they expect to find. Sometimes the things which reviewers 
sum up as the contents of the book are just the contrary of what 
the book contains. 

A critic in T/u- IVi^dk of Toronto, Canada, speaks of monistic 
positivism, but how much is he mistaken in what it means ! The 
following extracts show how little acquainted he is with the ideas 
set forth in "The Soul of Man " : 

"By monistic positivism is meant a philosophy which postulates 'The 

Positivism is a philosophy which knows of no postulates, but 
takes the positive facts of experience as its data. 

" . . . . It is positive because there is no reality, no selective activity, 
mind, but the law of ' The All ' is mechanical." 

When did I ever declare " mind " to be no reality ? There is 
no selective faculty in the sense of " hypermechanical impulses," 
but there is mind, and mind is a reality. 

When did I ever declare that the law of " the All " is mechan- 
ical ? I maintained that all motions are mechanical, but feeling 
is not mechanical. The supposed interconvertibility of feeling 
and motion has been expressly declared to be an error. 
" The ' All ' is discovered mainly that it may be worshipped." 
We have never proposed to worship the All. 
"The book before us tells us how far the Monistic Positivists have now 
got. They have some information of the nervous system — principally cuts 
taken from authorities . . . whom they call the fathers of Monistic Positivism." 

Does the critic of T/ie Jl'cck think that Monistic Positivism is 
a sect ? What a queer notion to call our great physiologists the 
Fathers of Monistic Positivism ! 
The Independeiil says : 
" So far as the book has any consistent standpoint it is that of mechanical 

In a similar strain TJie Christian Union pronounces its verdict. 
It says : 

" Dr. Carus is convinced that anatomy and physiology are the only proper 
pathways of knowledge to the nature of the soul. This is in outline what we 
understand to be his philosophy of things. There are entities or centres of 
energy which may be named atoms. These tend to cohere, and when they 
have collected they become an organism. The organisms also tend to congre- 
gate, and when they have succeeded, the result is a body. The energy is 
manifested double, whether in the simpler atom or the germ. It works out- 
wards in its relations to others, and inward to preservation of self. When the 
congregation of entities or germs is complete, this outward working central- 
ises, and is manifested as life, and, in its highest condition, soul. 

"The real question is whether his physiological psychology is true. It 
cannot be dismissed easily as blank materialism of the pantheistic school. . . . 
Nevertheless, a question or two may be asked. What brings together, first of 

Is this muddle of words supposed to be a summary of my 
views ? My first idea was that my representation of the subject 
must have been lacking in clearness, although my critic adds : 

" Dr. Carus's book possesses the merit of clearness and frankness ; though 
we utterly differ from his fundamental hypothesis." 

I am much obliged for this praise, but I fear, it has been al- 
lotted too rashly. My critic says, "Dr. Carus is convinced that 
anatomy and physiology are the only proper pathways of knowledge 
to the nature of the soul," whereas I maintain, that although 
anatomy and physiology are indispensable, they are not by any 
means exclusively sufficient for a proper study of the human soul. 

I have to add that I nowhere spoke of " entities" nor of " cen- 
tres of energy." I did not say that " life is only a mode of energy." 
I said that "the energy which living beings expend in their ac- 
tivity, in their motions, their passions, and in their thoughts, is 
the same energy that we meet with everywhere, and which is pro- 
duced in animal bodies in a more complicated way, yet in a similar 
manner as work is done by machines." In other words, life is a 
mode of energy in so far only as the motions of living organisms 
are considered. Thought is no energy, feeling is no energy ; but 
when man thinks and when he feels, energy is expended. 

My first thought was that I had not made my views clear 
enough, when I met with another view in TJie Reform Advoeatc, 
which, I am informed, comes from the pen of the editor, Dr. 
Hirsch. My view is summed up in the following words : 

"Anatomy and physiology alone do not suf&ce to give the key to the rid- 
dles of life and the universe. The geistige Band of which Goethe speaks is 
not found along the lines of dissection Dr. Carus is a monist. His phi- 
losophy is positive. But nbt the crude positiveness of Comte and his blind 
followers, much rather the loftier, because in the true sense of the term more 

deal posit 
ng chapte 

v'ism of Noire 
5 of the book a 
ely thankful t( 
results study these. The 
ist. Their dogmatism is 
concepts which deserve n 
of the shoulder, the altogether tc 
study in this book. His teacher 

luld have his qualified assent The conclud- 

those which interested us most, and for which we 
he Doctor. Two classes of men might with good 
yielding orthodox and the equally dogmatic athe- 
5II exposed. That God and immortality are not 
ely a pitying scornful smile, or an impatient shrug 
d agnostic of younger years might well 
nan of the greatest liberality of views. 

free from the trammels of theological prejudices It is refreshing to find 

one who speaks clearly on these things after the haze of would be enlightened 
twaddle. His discussion of the relation and the difference of Nature and God 
is to our mind one of the most suggestive of the volume. And what has pleased 
us most is the emphasis with which he pricks the presumption of basing 
ethics on happiness or any other foundation save that of an eternal outlook. 
.... His religion of the future has in very truth all the essentials of the faith 
which alone can win the assent and devotion of the thinker." 

Am I mistaken if I suspect both my critics, the reviewer of 
The ]Veek and the reviewer of the Christian Union to be clergy- 
men ? It seems to me most difficult to a certain class of pious be- 
lievers to understand and to state with objective impartiality the 
views of others. The critic of The Week says : 

"The avowed purpose of Monistic Positivists is to build up a religion on 

monistic positivism A science which has repudiated in turn the dogmatic 

of the scholastics and the " natural religion " of Auguste Comte is now too in- 
dependent to show much patience toward this new form of irreligious seduc- 

Is it so difficult for a theologian to give to science what be- 
longs to science ? It is sometimes notable how little theologians 
care and how little they try to understand scientific methods of in- 
vestigation. Their lack of scientific insight is plainly shown when 
they denounce physiological psychology as materialism because 
they consider it a denial of the spiritual element of the soul. Dr. 
Hirsch is also a theologian, but he appears almost as an exception. 
There are very few who recognise with him that science can have 
her full due without the slightest detraction from true religion. 

p. c. 





I was the spirit of Japan, 

I, the ennobler, I, the sword ; 
Of all her islands I was lord 

And with me power to bless or ban. 

I made the boor a gentleman ; 
I taught the striving mass accord 
In gentle ways ; for my reward 

They kept me bright as honor can. 

New days are come, old days are dead. 

And warriors now no more rely 
On valiant steel but worthless lead. 

My servant once, the Samurai, 
Now wields the yardstick in my stead, 
For it is mightier than I. 



What meaneth this despondent mind ? 

And when shall idle wishing cease ? 
We cannot leave the world behind, 

But conquering it we may find peace. 

Perchance if hence one could depart. 
Soon might he yearn to come again ; 

O show the world a gentle heart. 
Whose joy lies in assuaging pain ! 

Irrevocably fades the leaf. 

And strength of youth shall pass away ; 

There are abysses dark to griefs- 
Alas ! the deepest hell are they ! 

We see them ; over them we go. 
Not halting in the eager race ; 

And happiness lies close to woe. 

And grief and mirth with life keep pace. 

The moon is sailing o'er the sky, 
Now shining full, now lost to sight ; 

So, too, this changeful life doth fly. 
Evanishing in clouds of night. 



Katechismus der Handlese-Kunst. Bearbeitet von Giistav 
Gessmann. Mit 19 Tafein, Berlin : Verlag von Karl Siegis- 

The author of this interesting little pamphlet has compiled 
from several sources the data of Chiromantic belief, and explains 
them in concise outlines with the assistance of many instructive 
plates. Chirosophy, or the science of reading the character and 
fate of a person in the formation and lines of his hands, is a quaint 
study, and we do not deny that there is some truth in it. We 
may for instance distinguish a farmer, a tailor, a scholar, or a 
blacksmith simply by looking at their hands, but we cannot go so 
far as Mr. Gessmann goes, who considers Chiromancy as a regular 
science, which has the same rights as for instance "Meteorology, 
which upon the foundation of known facts and according to cer- 
tain rules of experience prophecies the probability of rain, snow, 
storm, etc." Let alone other things. Chiromancy is an amusing 
pastime, and those who wish to know something about the heart 
line, the head line, the lines of life, of health, of the sun, the 
characteristics of artistic, psychical, square, and spade-like 
hands, or other details of this branch of occult knowledge will find 
this little pamphlet very useful. Kpi;. 

Religion of Man and Ethics of Science. By Hudson Tuttle 

New York : M. L. Holbrook & Co. 

This book does not represent our views, its author belongs to 
that class of thinkers who are generally called spiritualists. We 
find, nevertheless, many ideas which meet with our hearty sym- 
pathy and approval. This is true mainly of the ethical truths. 
The present book is intended to set forth the Religion of Man in 
opposition to the Religion of the Gods, the former being conceived 
of as the religion of the future, the latter as the religion of the 
past. Mr. Hudson Tuttle says : 

" The Religion of the Gods comes from without, as a foreign 
system, to be received by the servile devotee ; the Religion of Man 
originates from within, and is a normal growth of humanity." 

" The field is new ; broad as the universe; profound as the 
depths of space ; as high as heaven." 

The question What is Religion ? is answered on p. 63 as 
"Devotion to the right, consecration to duty, unshrinking self- 
sacrifice." Kpf. 


Lieut. Col, M. von Egidy whose pamphlet " Ernste Gedan- 
ken," was the subject of a few comments in a former number of 
The Open Court, is continuing his missionary work of religious 
reformation and has sent us a number of tracts of the same ten- 
dency as the pamphlet mentioned. 

We have received from Dr. William J. Harris, United States 
Commissioner of Education, a brochure of seventy-seven pages, 
(with portrait frontispiece) entitled ' ' Thoughts on Educational Psy- 
chology." The reflections of Dr Harris will be read with interest 
by all. Dr. Harris also sends us a pamphlet on " The Right of 
Property and the Ownership of Land." 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 






L. J. Vance 2773 


Trumbull 2776 


A Japanese Sword. Louis Belrose, Jr 2778 

A Reply. Mary Morgan (Gowan Lea) 2778 






The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion AA^ith Science. 

No. 191. (Vol. 


CHICAGO, APRIL 23, 1891. 

1 Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



There was a time — and that not man)' centuries 
ago — when science occupied herself only with material 
nature and even there only with the simpler parts, and 
parts most removed from the immediate wants and 
highest interests of man. For example, while king- 
doms were crumbling and society decaying about her, 
she busied herself with investigating the curious prop- 
erties of the curves made by cutting a cone in differ- 
erent directions. The higher human concerns she left 
to her sister. Philosophy, to solve, and her sister. Lit- 
erature, to illustrate and embody in forms of beauty. 
Is it any wonder then that she should have been 
taunted for her supposed earthy and groveling spirit? 
Is it any wonder that she became the butt for the shafts 
of ridicule of her nimble witted sister literature, and 
the object of scorn of her imperial sister Philosophy? 
But she was sadly misjqdged. She attacked first the 
most remote things, not because they were the most 
remote, but because they were the simplest and there- 
fore the easiest to reduce to law and order. She 
avoided the nearest and dearest concerns of human 
life, not because they were nearest and dearest, but 
because they were so complex and difficult that she 
despaired of reducing them to laws. Law and order 
and completeness are her passion. She is loth to un- 
dertake what she cannot do well. Meanwhile content 
to work in silence in her own lowly domain, taunted 
and misjudged century after century, with a divine 
patience, she bided her time. After establishing 
herself firmly in her first narrow limits, she began 
to extend her domain to more complex subjects. 
From mathematics she passed to mechanics, then to 
astronomy, then to physics, then to chemistr}', redu- 
cing these successively from chaos to order. Then she 
extended her dominion to biology also. This brings 
her near to man, but not yet in his higher parts. Then 
she invades the domain of brain physiology and 
touches now the borders of psychology. Last of all 
she dares invade also sociology and thus touches at 
last the highest interests of man and the noblest de- 
partment of thought — the science of social organisa- 
tion, of social progress, of politics and of government. 

*.4n address 
Berkeley', March ; 

Charter Day of the Un 

iity o£ Calitor: 

Now at last her transcendent worth is acknowledged 
by all. 

For ages upon ages, like Cinderella, she sat among 
the ashes content to do her humble work while her 
proud sisters flaunted their gaudy colors in the eyes of 
an admiring world. But now at last touched by the 
fairy wand of Reason she is transformed into a prin- 
cess and seems likely to govern the world. But is it 
not barely possible that although now exalted into a 
queen some of her kitchen ways and kitchen thoughts 
still cling about her ? Is it not true that having worked 
so long in the ashes she still imagines that all things 
are but different forms of dust and ashes? Does she 
not still look too much downward instead of upward ? 
In a word is there not a strong tendency in modern 
science to drag down everything to a material plane ? 
It has been my constant effort — I deem it my highest 
mission in life — to resist this tendency in myself and 
to counteract it in others by an appeal in the name of 
science, from her lower self to her higher self, from 
Cinderella, the kitchen maid, to Cinderella, the royal 
princess ; in a word, to lift science to a recognition of 
her own glorious mission, that of verif3'ing and at the 
same time giving rational form to all our noblest beliefs 
and aspirations. 

Meanwhile, however, out of these ancient antag- 
onisms and traditional tendencies there has grown up 
two opposite modes of viewing nature, which may al- 
most be said to characterise philosophy and literature 
on the one hand and science on the other. The one 
is the natural result of dealing with man in his higher 
activities ; the other of dealing, at first entirely and 
even yet mainly, with nature and with man in his lower 
activities. The outcome of the one is a spiritual phi- 
losophy despising our material nature ; of the other a 
material philosophy ignoring our spiritual nature. 
These two opposite camps of thought have always 
been at feud, but now are preparing for a final 
struggle. Of course the battle ground will be the na- 
ture of man. For there, if anywhere, these two na- 
tures, the spiritual and material, meet and mingle. 

There are, then, two extreme views — the old and 
the new — as to the relation of man to nature and espe- 
cially to the animal kingdom. According to the one, 
the old, there is an infinite gulf separating man 



from all else in nature ; the differences between man 
and the highest animal is far greater than between 
the highest animal and the lowest microbe — the dif- 
ferences in the two cases are wholly incommensurable. 
Man must be set over as an equivalent not only against 
the whole animal kingdom, but against all nature be- 
side — Nature, the Divine revelation and man the in- 
terpreter. According to the other, the new, it is im- 
possible to exaggerate the closeness of the connection 
of man to the animal kingdom. Every bone, muscle, 
nerve, and organ of the body and every faculty of the 
mind has its correspondent in animals of which those 
in man are but slightly modified forms. Man has grown 
up out of the animal kingdom by gradual evolution 
and is even yet nothing more than the highest animal. 

Again we find the same two extreme views — the 
old and the new — as to the organisation of society and 
the progress of man. According to the one — the old — 
these have nothing whatever to do with any law of na- 
ture. They are wholly the result of our spiritual nature 
and must be studied wholly apart and can receive no 
assistance from science. According to the other — the 
new — the organisation of the animal body is the type 
of the organisation of the social body, and all the prin- 
ciples and methods of biology must be carried over 
into the higher field of sociology. Nature is one without 
break from the inorganic and dead through the organic 
and living up to the intellectual and moral. No per- 
manent progress can be made in the rational knowl- 
edge or science of man except by identifying it with 
that of lower animals. Human anatomy never made 
any scientific progress until it became a part of com- 
parative anatomy, nor human physiology until it be- 
came comparative physiology. So also must psychol- 
ogy be studied in relation to the psychical phenomena 
of animals, sociology in connection with biology and 
social progress in connection with organic evolution 
before these can be truly scientific. 

Now it has been often and truly said that in all 
such cases of extreme, mutually excluding views, both 
are right and both are wrong. Each is right from its 
own point of view, but wrong in excluding the other 
point of view. Therefore, a true philosophy is found 
in a more comprehensive view which combines and 
reconciles the apparent opposites, not indeed by pool- 
ing their issues, but by transcending them, by including 
what is true in both and explaining their differences. 
A true philosophy is a stereoscopic combination of two 
different surface-views into one solid tridimensional 

Such a more comprehensive and therefore more 
rational view, I am convinced, is found in my view of 
the origin of man's spirit (of his body there is no ques- 
tion) — of the origin of man's spirit from the anima 
ut animals, of the pneuma of man from the psyche of 

animals — by a process of evolution. According to this 
view, spirit in embryo in the womb of nature, uncon- 
scious of itself, but slowly developing through all geo- 
logical times, at last came to birth into a higher spirit- 
ual and immortal world — at last became self-con- 
scious, self-active free spirit in man. Thus the whole 
process of evolution of the organic kingdom, through 
infinite time becomes naught else than a divine method 
for the creation of spirits. 

I cannot now do more than allude to this view. 
Some of you already know it. To others any attempt 
to restate it would take more time than I have at my 
command. Now this view of the origin of man's spirit 
completely explains the paradox of human nature. It 
completely explains, as none other does, the closeness 
of connection, and yet the infinitude of difference be- 
tween the spirit of man and the psyche of animals, be- 
tween the social organism and the animal body and 
between social progress and organic evolution. On a 
previous occasion similar to this I dwelt on one of 
these, viz. the relation of the social organism to the 
animal body and the relation of sociology to biology. 
My object to-day is to touch lightly the other, viz. the 
close connection, and yet the great differences between 
human progress and organic evolution. 

* * 

I assume that organic evolution accomplished its 
purpose, achieved its end, reached its goal, in man. 
But as spirit in embryo in animals was born into a 
higher plane of activity in man, so organic evolution 
reaching its goal and completion in man was imme- 
diately transferred to this higher plane and became 
human evblution or social progress. As organic evo- 
lution reached its goal and completion in man, so must 
human evolution ever stretch forward to reach its goal 
and completion in the ideal man, the divine man. 

Now, on this new and higher plane, all the factors 
of organic evolution must continue to operate as be- 
fore ; as before the environment physical and organic 
must modify the activities bodily and mental ; as be- 
fore use and disuse of organs and faculties must pro- 
duce corresponding increase and decrease of the parts 
used ; as before the struggle for life and the survival 
of the fittest must operate to perfect the race. But 
there is, there must be, a new factor introduced here, 
which immediately takes control of all the other fac- 
tors, transforming their character and using them for 
its own higher purposes. This new and higher factor 
if factor it may be called (for it is much more) is the 
conscious, voluntary co-operation of the thing develop- 
ing — i. e.'the spirit of man — in the work of its own 

This new factor is the necessary result of the birth 
of spirit from previous embryonic sleep into self con- 
scious and self-active life. It must, therefore, have 



commenced its activity from the first emergence of hu- 
manity out of animalit}^ But at first it was feeble. In 
his earhest stages undoubtedly man, like other animals, 
was urged on bj' forces of organic evolution unknowing 
and uncaring whither he tended. But more and more as 
civilisation advanced, this higher and distinctively hu- 
man factor became more and more dominant until 
now in highly civilised communities, it takes control 
of evolution. This free self-determined evolution of 
the race, to distinguish it from the necessary evolution 
of the organic kingdom, we call progress. 

But as already said, when the new and distinct- 
ively human factor appears, the previously operating 
factors do not disappear, but only become subordinate. 
They not only still exist, but they underlie and condi- 
tion the activity of the higher factors. This is only 
one illustration of a universal law of organic nature. 
In every system of correlated parts in harmonious re- 
lation with one another b)' mutual dependence, the 
higher stands above and dominates the lower, but the 
lower underlies and conditions the higher. The spirit 
dominates the body, and more and more in proportion 
to the spiritual energy, but the body underlies and 
conditions the activity of the spirit. The same is true 
of all the organs of the body and the faculties of the 
mind in their relation to one another. The same is 
true of the factors of human evolution. 

There is a resemblance and yet infinite difference 
between human progress and organic evolution. The 
resemblance almost amounting to identity in many re- 
spects, arising, of course, from the operations of the 
organic factors, has been pointed out by all recent 
writers, especially and with profuse illustrations and 
almost tedious insistence by Herbert Spencer. These, 
therefore, are probably already known to you. My 
object is now to bring into strong relief some of the 
differences, even contrasts produced wholly by the in- 
troduction of the new factor ; differences which are 
usually ignored, or slurred over, or at least minimised 
by evolutionists, because modern science seems to 
think it must ignore the spiritual nature of man on 
pain of being thought unscientific. 

See^then some of these contrasts. 

I. In organic evolution nature operates bj' neces- 
sary law without the co-operation of the thing evolv- 
ing. In human progress the spirit of man voluntarily 
CO operates with nature in the work of its own evolu- 
tion and even assumes to take the whole process 
mainly into its own hands. This new voluntary factor 
consists essentially in the formation and pursuit of 
ideals — the voluntary striving after higher and better 
things in the individual and in the race. We indeed 
form ideals, but our ideals react and form us. As are his 
ideals such is the man. Organic evolution operates by 
the law of force ; human progress bj' the law of love. 

2. In organic evolution the fittest are those most 
in harmony with the physical environment, and there- 
fore they survive. In human progress the fittest are 
those in harmony with the ideal and often, especially 
in earl)' stages when man is still under the dominion 
of the organic factors and the spiritual factor is still 
feeble, they do not survive because out of harmony 
with the social environment. But while the fittest 
individuals may indeed perish, the ideal survives in 
the race and will eventually triumph. 

3. In organic evolution the sick, the helpless, the 
unfit in any way perishes and ought to perish, because 
this is the only way of strengthening the blood or 
physical nature of the species. In human progress the 
weak, the helpless, the sick, the unfit are sustained 
and ought to be sustained because S5'mpathy, love and 
pity strengthens the spirit, the moral nature. 

But remember, in this material world of ours and 
during this earthly life the spiritual and moral nature 
is conditioned on the physical nature, and therefore 
in all our attempts to help the weak we must be care- 
ful to avoid poisoning the blood and weakening the 
physical vigor. The gravest of social problems, viz. : 
How shall we obey the higher spiritual law of love 
and mutual help without weakening the blood of the 
race by inheritance and the spirit of the race by re- 
moving the necessity of self-help — this problem, I be- 
lieve, can and will be solved by a rational education, 
physical, mental, and moral. 

4. In organic evolution the bodily form and structure 
must continually change in order to keep in harmony 
with the ever changing environment. In human evo- 
lution or progress, on the contrary, and more and as 
civilisation advances, man modifies the environment 
so as to bring it in harmony with himself, and there- 
fore there is no necessity for change of bodily form 
and structure or making of new species of man. Hu- 
man evolution is not by modification of form — new 
species — but by modification of spirit — new planes of 
activity and higher character ; and the spirit is modi- 
fied and the character elevated, not by pressure of an 
external physical environment, but by the attractive 
force of an internal spiritual ideal. 

5. The way of evolution toward the highest, i. e. from 
protozoon to man and from lowest man to the ideal 
man is a straight and narrow way and few there be 
that find it. In the case of organic evolution it is so 
straight and so narrow that any divergence therefrom 
is fatal to upward movement. Once leave the track, 
and it is impossible to get on it again. No living form 
of animal is to-day on its way man-ward or can by any 
possibility develop into man. They are all gone out 
of the way. There is none going right, no not one. 
The organic kingdom developing through all geological 
times may be likened to a tree whose trunk is deeply 



buried in the lowest strata, whose great limbs were 
separated in the early geological times, whose secon- 
dary branches diverged later, and whose extreme twig- 
lets, but also its graceful leafage, its beautiful flowers 
and luscious fruits, are the fauna and flora of the 
present day. But this tree of evolution is an excurrent 
stem continuous through its clustering branches to the 
terminal shoot, man. Once leave this stem as a branch 
and it is easy enough growing in the direction chosen, 
but impossible to get back on to the straight upward 
way to the highest. In human evolution the same 
laws indeed hold, but with a difference. If the indi- 
vidual, or the race gets off from the straight and nar- 
row way toward the highest, — the divine ideal, — it is 
hard to get on the track again. Hard I say, but not 
impossible. By virtue of self-activity through the use 
of reason and co-operation in the work of evolution, 
man alone, of all created things, is able to rectify an 
error of direction and return again to the deserted way. 

6. We have spoken of several factors of organic evo- 
lution of different grades. Whenever a higher factor 
is introduced it immediately assumes control ; previous 
factors sink into a subordinate position. But in human 
evolution the self determining rational factor when it 
comes in with the birth of the spirit of man, not only 
assumes control but transforms all other factors and 
uses them in a new way for its own higher purposes. 
It is evolution on another and a higher plane. It is 
another kind of evolution, determined by another 
and higher nature — the spiritual — though indeed still 
conditioned by the laws of organic evolution. As ex- 
ternal and physical nature uses many factors to carry 
forward organic evolution, so the internal and spirit- 
ual nature characteristic of man alone uses these same 
factors on a higher plane and in a new way for human 
evolution or progress. Thus for example one organic 
factor — the environment — -i3 modified or even totally 
changed, so as to effect suitably the human organism. 
This is Hygeine. Again, ?«c and disuse, another fac- 
tor, is similarly transformed. The various organs of 
the body and faculties of the mind are deliberately 
used in such manner and degree as to produce the 
highest efficiency of each part and the greatest beauty 
of the whole. This is education — physical, mental, and 
moral. Selective factors are similarly transformed 
and natural selection becomes rational selection. This, 
as we know, has been successfully applied to plants 
and to domestic animals. Why should it not be ap- 
plied also to the improvement of our race by selection 
of our mates in marriage, of our rulers, our law- ma- 
kers, our teachers. Alas, how little even yet does 
reason control our selection in these things ! How 
largely are we yet under the control of the law of or- 
ganic evolution ! 

7. Evolution as a law of the origin of organic 

forms, is as certain and as universal as the law of 
gravitation. But the causes, the factors and the pro- 
cesses of evolution — the details of the manner in 
which evolution is carried out — these are still in the 
realm of discussion. Now in these latter times there 
has arisen a class of biologists including some of high- 
est rank, who out-Darwin Darwin himself in the exal- 
tation of the distinctive Darwinian factor — natural se- 
lection. They try to show that natural selection is 
the sole and sufficient cause of evolution — that changes 
in the individual, whether as the effect of the environ- 
ment or by use and disuse of organs, are not inherited 
at all ; that Lamarck was wholly wrong and Darwin 
was wholly right, or rather was wrong only in mak- 
ing any compromise at all with Lamarck. 

I cannot at all accept this view, but shall not stop 
now to argue the question, partly because I have not 
time and partly because unsuitable for popular pre- 
sentation. I wish only to point out some logical con- 
sequences in regard to human progress which seem to 
have escaped these Biologists — consequences which 
are, it seems to me, nothing less than a rcductio ad ab- 

In organic evolution when the struggle for life is 
fierce and pitiless, as it is now among the higher ani- 
mals, natural selection is by far the most potent 
factor. It is conceivable though not probable, that 
at the present time organic evolution might be carried 
on wholly by this factor alone. But in human evolu- 
tion, especially in civilised communities, this is im- 
possible. If these biologists be right, then alas for 
all our hopes of race improvement. For natural se- 
lection will never be applied by man to himself, as it 
is by nature to organisms. His spiritual nature for- 
bids. Reason may freely use the Lamarckian factors 
of environment and of use and disuse ; but is debarred 
the unscrupulous use of natural selection as its only 
method. As this is an important point, I must ex- 

All enlightened schemes of physical culture or hy- 
giene, though directed primarily to secure the strength, 
the health, and the happiness of the. present gcncratwii, 
yet are sustained and ennobled by the conviction that 
the improvement of the individual of each gene- 
ration enters by inheritance into the gradual physi- 
cal improvement of the race. All our schemes of 
education, intellectual and moral, though certainly in- 
tended mainly for the improvement of the individual, 
are glorified by the hope that the race also is thereby 
gradually elevated. It is true 'that these hopes are 
usually extravagant. It is true that the whole im- 
provement of one generation is not carried forward 
by inheritance into the next. It is true, therefore, 
that we cannot by education raise a lower race up 
to the plane of a higher in a few generations, or 



even in a few centuries. But there must be at 
least a small residuum carried forward from each 
generation to the next, which, accumulating from 
age to age, determines the slow evolution of the race. 
Are all these hopes baseless ? They are so, if Weis- 
mann and Wallace are right. If it be true that rea- 
son must direct the course of evolution, and if it be 
also true, as these biologists assert, that selection 
of the fittest is the onl}' method which can be used 
by reason, then the dreadful law of pitiless destruc- 
tion of the weak and helpless must with Spartan 
firmness be voluntarily and deliberately carried out. 
Against such a course we instinctively revolt with hor- 
ror because contrary to the law of the spiritual nature. 

But the use by reason of the Lamarckian factors, 
as already shown, is not attended with any such re- 
volting consequences. All our hopes of race improve- 
ment, therefore, are strictly conditioned on the efficacy 
of these factors, i. e. on the fact that useful changes 
in each generation are to some extent inherited and 
accumulated in the race. 

Lastly we have said that the new factor introduced 
with man is a voluntary co-operation in the process 
of evolution, a striving toward a higher condition, a 
drawing forward and upward by the attractive force of 
ideals. Man, contrary to all else in nature, is trans- 
formed, not in shape by an external environment, but 
in character by his own ideals. Now this capacity, 
characteristic of man alone, of forming ideals and this 
conscious voluntary pursuit of such ideals, whence 
comes it? When analysed and reduced to its simplest 
terms, it is naught else than the consciousness in man 
of his close relation to the infinite and the attempt to 
realise the divine in human character. 



Co.MPARE the methods of expelling spirits cited in 
the last article, with the performances of the Thlinkeet 
doctor. " It is their business," says Mr. Wood, " to 
seize the soul with the mouth and breathe or force it 
back into the body. I only saw one Shaman exor- 
cising and I do not believe he would have continued 
had he known I was observing him. He kneaded, 
pounded, yelled, chanted, frothed, swayed to and fro, 
played tunes, all up and down the suffering patient ; 
blew in his mouth and nostrils and literally worried 
the life out of him. In general practice the Shaman 
continues till the wretched patient declares he is 
better."* Mr. Paul Beckwith, in his notes on the 
Dakotahs, says : " To impress upon the mind of the 
patient the divine nature of his medicines, the medi- 
cine-man adds to the efficacy of his remedies, myste- 

* Century Mag., July, 1882. 

rious incantations, contortions of feature and body, 
accompanied always by a drum, often placing upon 
the ground a paper or bark figure (note the connection 
between man and his image) and while the friends 
are holding the patient over it, shoots it with his gun. " * 

The same idea is brought out in Mr. Willbugh- 
by's account of the Indians of the Quinaielt Agency, 
Washington Territory. "The me-satch-ies, or evil 
spirits, take possession of sick people and whom doc- 
tors are employed to drive out. With the loud beat- 
ing of Indian drums and of sticks accompanied by 
their own voices and the contortions and guttural 
howls and wails of their doctors, they seek to drive 
out the unwelcome guest. The lips of the medicine- 
man are often applied to the body to draw out the 
evil spirit." t 

This brings us to the point that we would be at. 
It is part and parcel of the doctor's magic to not onl}' 
drive out the evil spirit, but to show the cause of the 
disease. How does he do that ? Simply enough. 
The savage doctor sucks the spot, and then he takes 
out of his mouth a stick, stone, frog, lizard, or some 
other object. Thus, the Karoks of California have 
what they call a " barking doctor " (woman mostly). J 
She first discovers the seat of the disease, sucks until 
the blood comes, then "takes an emetic and vomits 
up a frog, which she pretends comes from the pa- 
tient." This form of magic is almost universal among 

There seems to be no end to the miraculous powers 
of the medicine-man. What the Incas allowed of 
their Shamans is true of every other semi-cultured 
race of people. According to the early Spanish his- 
torian, De Herrera, "The Incas allowed of one sort 
of them, who were said to take upon themselves 
whatsoever shape they pleased, to fly through the air, 
whither and as far as they pleased, to converse with 
the Devil. These men served instead of sootli sayers 
and fortune-tellers and to give account of what was 
done in remote parts before any news could be other- 
wise brought." § 

Nor have the attributes of the medicine-men been 
exhausted. They are expert jugglers. They are 
clairvoyants, but they are sleight-of-hand performers 
of the first order. Doctor Stock well says that, "all 
medicine-men of first rank are clairvoyants and psy- 
chologists (mesmerists if }'ou like) of no mean pre- 
tensions, as a rule capable of affording instruction to 
the most able of their white confreres." The doctor 
goes on to say that " he has witnessed feats of leger- 
demain and necromancy that would appall a Houdia 
or a Heller executed in broad daylight, with mystic 

* Smith. Rept., 1886, pt. 
t Ibid,, p. 2-5. 
i Smith. Rept., 1SS6. p. 235. 
§ General riisty. of An 

ol. 4, P- 353- (Tiansla 



aids or surroundings." Thus, he mentions a per- 
formance in which guns, manifestly in perfect order 
failed to shoot in the hands of expert marksmen, 
merely through a look, a word or a bit of incantation ; 
and yet again restored by a like process.* 

Dr. Franz Boas, who spent considerable time 
among the Eskimos, was amazed at the feats of the 
angakut, or medicine-man. He gives an account of 
several wonderful performances. In one case, the 
angakut threw himself upon a harpoon " which pene- 
trated his breast and came out at the back." Three 
men followed, holding the harpoon line ; they led the 
angakut, bleeding profusely, to all the huts of the vil- 
lage. Then, he lay down on a bed, and was put to 
sleep by the so7igs of another angakut. "When he 
awoke after a while, he showed to the people that he 
was not hurt, although his clothing was torn and they 
had seen him bleeding." Many other feats, quite as 
wonderful, are recorded by Dr. Boas.f 

2. Again, our idea of the magic power of songs 
and incantations is borne out by well-authenticated 
reports of the performances of medicine-men. Every- 
where we see that the Shaman ekes out his magic by 
songs ; everywhere we find the belief that much can 
be accomplished by singing. Dr. Boas says that " the 
Angakuts use a sacred language in their songs and 
incantations," and that many of the words have a 
symbolic meaning. J 

Francis La Flesche, a native Omaha, has recently 
described one of the most remarkable cures of a medi- 
cine-man that we have come across. § The entire 
story is interesting, but space forbids more than one 
or two details. It appears that a boy had been acci- 
dentally shot through the head. At once the medi- 
cine-men of the tribe were called in. " The man who 
was first to try his charms and medicines on the patient 
began by telling in a loud voice how he became pos- 
sessed of them ; how in a vision he had seen the buf- 
falo which had revealed to him the mysterious secrets 
of the medicine, and the charm song he was taught to 
si?ig when icsing the medicine. " At the end of his story 
he started his song, and the other doctors sang in 

Mr. La Flesche continues: "This song is quite 
poetical to the Indian mind. It not only qonveys a 
picture of the prairie, the round wallow with its gleam- 
ing water, and the buffalo drama, but it reveals the 
expectancy of the dreamer, and the bestowing of the 
power of the vision upon him for the benefit of suf- 
ferers. " Sure enough, the boy got well, although an 
Army doctor, when he saw the practices of the Omaha 

* Pop. Science Monthly, Sept., 1S8S. 
t Dr. Boas's account of "The Central Eskh 
nology) is worthy of careful study. 
t P. 594. 
S Journ. American F. L., vol. 3, p. 217 

' (Sixth Am. Kept. Eth- 

medicine-men, "shook his head, sighed, and made 
some queer little noises with his tongue, expressive 
of his feelings." 

Extremely valuable in this connection, is the Na- 
vajo " Mountain Chant," set forth by Dr. Washington 
Matthews.* Here we have a ceremonial, lasting nine 
days, parts of which are intimately connected with the 
cure of disease. 

It is not easy to give the explanation of the savage 
belief in the power of songs. Just how songs and 
incantations originated is not well understood. Per- 
haps the best explanation has been given by Mr. 
Howitt in his notes on "Songs and Songmakers " 
of some Australian tribes. f He says : " it is a com- 
mon belief that the songs, including all kinds of abo- 
riginal poetry, are obtained by the bards from the 
spirits of the deceased." Thus, the Bira-ark of the 
Kurnai tribe "profess to receive their poetic inspira- 
tion from the ghosts " (Mrart), as well as the dances 
which they were supposed to have seen first in ghost- 
land. Just as in the Arabian Nights' story of the 
" Forty Thieves," the door opens onty at the magic 
word — Sesame ! so in mdrchen wonders are wrought 
by repeating set words or .bits of rhyme. 

3. As to charms, we have already seen how the 
idea of a kind of " luck " clings to this or that object. 
There are several reasons why certain things should 
be deemed magical or lucky. Usually any real or 
fancied resemblance of one object to another, an)' 
analogy based on form, color, etc., is enough to give 
that object a reputation for magical virtues. Thus, in 
New Zealand a stone in shape ot a pig or of a yam 
was a most valuable find. Why ?, Because it made 
pigs multiply and yam plots fruitful. The Indian 
uses all sorts of stone or wooden figures as charms. 
In the Emmons collection from Alaska there are 
knives carved to represent the spirits possessed by 
the Shaman. One of these knives represents a crane, 
a mountain goat, a cuttle-fish, small spirits and a land 
otter. J " In dances," according to Lieut. Emmons, 
" the Shaman uses these knives to fight with an invisi- 
ble opponent." Just as they hang up charms in the 
Pacific Islands to keep away thieves, so in South 
Africa the Basutos hang a kite's foot round the child's 
neck to give swiftness. The Kaffir is a perfect slave 
to charms, and Mr. Theall says that they "hardly 
ever undertake any matter of importance without 
using them." § 

Mr. Lang regards the belief in luck as a relic of 
fetichism. He argues that " it is not at all impossible 
that the idea of a kind of luck, attached to this or that 
object, was evolved by a dint of meditating on a mere 

* Fifth An. Rept. Ethnology, pp. 385-467. 
t Journ, Anth. Inst., vol. 16, p. 228. 
X Journ. Am. Folk Lore, vol, 2, p. 217. 
§ Kaffir Folk Lore, p, 205. 



series of lucky accidents. Such or such a man, hav- 
ing found such an object, succeeded in hunting, fish- 
ing, or war. " Many people will not wear an opal, sim- 
ply because that stone is not considered lucky. Some 
wear amber beads to ward off erysipelas. The Nea- 
politans still wear amulets to avert the "evil eye." 

It is time that educated people understood the 
natural history of magic. The magician is not an im- 
postor, though he may be a juggler. Magic is not 
rooted in deceit, though it may have originated in 
bad reasoning. To the semi-cultured mind, any one 
kind of change is as magical as any other kind. The 
transformation of vibrating ether into the rainbow, of 
a blow into pain, of the printed page into visions of 
the beautiful, of the egg into the eagle, of the babe 
into the hero, of selfishness into love, — all these 
transformations are as magical to some people as the 
artificial formation of an icicle was to a certain Dutch 
king of Siam. 



Solemn is the night, 

Sombre is the day, 
Doubtful is the mood, 

Lonely is the way. 
Irksome is the task, 

Doleful is the play. 

Minutes only ours. 
Thinking all too slow, 

Acting as by chance, 
Onward the years go ! 

Mirrored is the sky 
In the lake below ; 

Mirrored, too. our lives 
Even thus, I ween : 

Impress of our touch 
Shall be, and hath been. 

Left on everything 

Birth and death between. 

Lips were silent when 

Words had conquered fate ; 

Stagnant lay the mind. 
Vision came too late. 

Come, O Past, return ! 
What shall compensate ? 

Future — solemn thought — 
Standeth there before ; 

Offers to us — what ? 
Opens it a door 

Whence is seen the star, 
Hope, forevermore ? 

Deep is the dark well 
Of the years gone by, 

Glimmers in its breast 
All futurity ; 

Light of heaven illumes 
Time's reraotesl sky. 



Beneath the writing of the restless years. 
Engraved on every heart lies unde61ed 
Life's earliest message to the wondering child ; 

Let the first lines be such as time endears. 

Not all is dark if memory reveres 

Some teacher born who made his wisdom mild ; 

Who sowed the seed but helped while April smiled 
To harvest joy against the time of tears. 

Such my good fortune, such the man I name; 

One of the few by negro bondmen blest 
That strove for freedom's sake and not for fame. 

But he was nature's friend and chose the best, 
As all the sunlight of his soul aflame. 

His wealth of days our wealth of love attest. 


There is a smell of sulphur in the air. and we hear in tones of 
ominous warning that Italy is putting on war-paint, dancing the 
ghost dance, and preparing to declare war against the United 
States. Simultaneously appears a catalogue of the Italian ships 
of war, their size, and strength, and armament, with columns of 
inexorable arithmetic showing the exact number of minutes it 
would require for a couple of them to destroy New York, Balti- 
more, or Boston. Then comes the expansion of the Italian power, 
blown into vastness by the trick of contrast, and windy lamenta- 
tion for our own inferiority. Prophets of danger croak in sad- 
ness that our ships are few and feeble ; and that in case of battle 
they would be useless either for fight or flight. Italy, they say, could 
strike us and defeat us before we could create a navy or build 
forts along the shore. All this looks like laying the foundation for 
a claim on Congress for additional millions to be wasted in the 
building of superabundant forts and ships. The chief defense of 
this nation is the moral strength of it, supported by its wealth, 
and the physical energies latent in its natural constitution, or held 
in reserve. This it is which makes the United States invincible, 
and practically invulnerable to-day. The security of this country 
rests upon its geographical position, and the ease with which its 
immense power could be made effective on short notice in case of 
actual war. 

In reference to the Italian quarrel, it is freely said that should 
Italy declare war against us, the first advantage would be with her 
because of her navy and her preparation, but this, though plausi- 
ble, is a short-sighted view of it. In modern times, nations be- 
fore they enter upon war must look more to the end than to the 
beginning of it. To the final result, and not to a mere initial suc- 
cess, they must direct their strategy and their statesmanship. One 
nation can make war, but it requires two nations to make peace. 
In 1870, France declared sudden war against Prussia, and no doubt 
would have been glad to declare a sudden peace at any time after 
the battle of Worth, but when it came to declaring peace, Prussia 
had something to say. Italy might, of course, declare sudden 
war against the United States, but at the end of it the treaty of 
peace would very likely be dictated by the United States, and not 
by Italy. Suppose the Italian fleet should pass the Narrows, and 
levy contribution upon the city of New York, is there a man in 
Italy foolish enough to believe that the United States would make 
peace until that ransom was paid back with usury ? The knowl- 
edge of this by other nations is our guarantee of peace. 

Another old castle has fallen down in England, after stand- 
ing invincible for centuries against all the forces of civilised com- 



mon sense. I refer to that ancient fortress of the law wherein 
was guarded the sacred superstition that a husband was the owner, 
the lord and master of his wife, A gentleman by the name of 
Jackson, who ought to have been at least a baron in the days of 
chivalry, left England for a time on business, while his wife re- 
mained behind with her mother and her sisters. On his re- 
turn his wife told him that she would rather live with her own 
folks than with his folks, or with him, therefore she must decline 
the honor of his further acquaintance. Now, Mrs, Jackson was a 
valuable bit of property, for she had an income of her own 
amounting to $3,000 a year. This was too precious to lose, and 
finding all persuasions useless, Mr, Jackson, after the feudal 
fashion, taking with him a band of his vassals and retainers, seized 
his wife as she was coming out of church at Clitheroe, and bear- 
ing her to his chariot, carried her off to his house at Blackburn, 
thirteen miles away. Here, figuratively speaking, he placed her 
in the donjon keep, lifted the drawbridge, manned the battle- 
ments with his archers, and prepared to stand a siege against all 
England. The sisters of Mrs, Jackson, with some retainers of 
their own, did besiege the stronghold for several days, without 
making any impression upon the fortifications, but at last a breach 
was made in the walls by means of an invention comparatively 
modern, a noiseless piece of artillery which no castle can with- 
stand, the writ of Habeas Corpus. Strange as it may seem, con- 
servative traditions were almost a match for that, and even came 
near defeating it, as we shall see. 

* " # 
It is to the advantage of muddy water that you cannot tell 
whether it is deep or shallow, and muddy minds often puzzle us 
in the same way. They pretend to be profound when they are 
only hazy and old. This was the mental condition of the Judges 
in the Jackson case, who having heard the evidence on the appli- 
cation for the writ of Habeas Corpus, denied the writ on the 
ground that Mr, Jackson was' justified in his action, "because," 
remarked the Judge, " a husband has the right to the custody of 
his wife, and even to seize and detain her if necessary," Those 
judges had become so learned in the antediluvian precedents, their 
minds were so enveloped in the cobwebs of antiquity, that a mod- 
ern idea seeking entrance there was caught and strangled in the 
attempt like a fly in a spider's net. The case being taken to the 
Court of Appeals, the decision was reversed, and the Lord Chan- 
cellor, in giving judgment, contemptuously overturned the le- 
gal fictions of centuries, saying " that it was with reluctance 
he could suppose that they had ever formed any part of the En- 
glish law," He also declared that "no English subject had 
the right to imprison another whether she was his wife or not" ; 
and therefore, said the Chancellor, "the lady must be restored 
to her freedom, and must be at complete liberty to choose her 
own place of residence." This is the most important decision 
affecting human liberty that has been rendered in England 
since the year 1782, when Lord Chief Justice Mansfield liberated 
the negro Somerset, on the ground that slavery was unknown to 
the English law, and that no slave could breathe the air of En- 

While the Jackson case was agitating England, another trial 
of great importance was going on at the town of Maldon in that 
country. Three desperate malefactors were arraigned for felony 
before the Bench of magistrates. These delinquents were Clara 
Williams, aged twelve ; Annie Williams, aged ten ; and Lillie 
Messent, aged nine. It appeared from the evidence that the 
youngest criminal, Lillie Messent, aged nine, finding five sover- 
eigns lying around loose in the house of her guardian, appropri- 
ated the money, and in company with her two accomplices Clara 
Williams, aged twelve, and Annie Williams aged ten, started off 
to paint the town red. The depravity of their taste was proved 

by the testimony, for they indulged in candy to excess. This 
was to be expected, but what puzzled the "Bench" was that 
such desperadoes had the aesthetic ambition to buy books, pic- 
tures, pencils, pencil cases, and an unreasonable quantity of per- 
fumery. It was also proven that the culprits were addicted to 
the reprehensible habit of " treating, " for all the little girls at 
school were sticky with candy, and so saturated with perfumery 
that the school-room had an aroma like the fabulous bower of 
roses. Owing to the inefficiency of the police, the revelry of the 
criminals was not arrested until all the money had been spent 
with the exception of ten shillings. The crime being fully proved, 
the Bench was " impaled on the horns of a dilemma." To sen- 
tence babies to prison was an old-fashioned practice that might 
bring the magistrates into ridicule, and perhaps to punishment ; 
while to discharge them would be an impeachment of the law. 
In this emergency they brought in the parents of the culprits and 
bound them over to bring the children up for judgment whenever 
called upon ; and in this way they got rid of the prisoners and at 
the same time vindicated -the law. 

M. M, Trumbull 



To I hf Editor of The Open Court:— 

I thank you for your article on my fourth Lecture. I quite 
agree with your objections, and when you see the whole of the 
lectures, you will find how carefully I guarded against this misap- 
prehension. The Infinite is simply the highest generalisation for 
all that ever formed the object of religion. There is no wider 
term, it is wider even than Spencer's Unknowable, as I tried to 
show. But here as elsewhere we want a katharsis of language, 
otherwise we shall never have a new philosophy, 

F. Max Mueller. 

Oxford, March 31, i8gi. 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $i.oo FOR SIX MONTHS, 


All comniunications should be addressed to 

. (Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 



Le Conte 2779 


L. J. Vance 2783 


Unrest. Mary Morgan (Gowan Lea.) 27S5 

To Theodore Weld, in his 8oth year. Louis Belrose, Jr 27S5 

CURRENT TOPICS. The Talk of War with Italy. The 
Law of Husband and Wife. Juvenile Criminals. Gen. 
M. M. Trumbull 2785 





The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion with Science. 

No. 192. (Vol. v.— 10. 

CHICAGO. APRIL 30 1891. 

J Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



On the last day of February, 1841, Emerson wrote 
thus to' Carlyle, about what Matthew Arnold thought 
"the most important work done in prose during 
the present century " : "In a fortnight or three weeks 
more, my little raft will be afloat. Expect nothing 
more of my powers of construction — no shipbuilding, 
no clipper, smack, nor skiff even, only boards and 
logs tied together." He meant the first volume of 
£ssays, containing those on " Self- Reliance," "Com- 
pensation," and "The Over-Soul." His little book 
entitled " Nature " bad appeared in September, 1836 ; 
most of the Addresses and Lectures, which were col 
lected in 1849, into a volume of Miscellanies, had been 
delivered and published separately before 1842 ; his 
" Problem " had just been printed in the Dial; and 
he had done a large part of his best work in both 
prose and verse, for some of the earliest pieces writ- 
ten were among the last to be given to the world. 
Thus he stood fifty years ago, at his full height of 

He was already widely known for the work of 
which he speaks thus in Xh^ Essays, "I unsettle all 
things. No facts are to me sacred ; none are pro- 
fane ; I simply experiment, an endless seeker, with no 
Past at my back." On the first page of Nature stand 
these words : " Our age is retrospective. . . . Let us 
demand our own works and laws and worship." In 
one of his earliest lectures, he said, " Every church, 
even the purest, speedily becomes old and dead. . . . 
Only a new church is alive." His address in Divinity 
Hall and his essay on "Self Reliance" protested 
against a religion of traditional beliefs and rites ; ex- 
aggeration of the merits of ancient personages, and 
conformity to "usages that have become dead." It 
was because this seemed to be the case with the com- 
munion service, that he had himself left the pulpit ; and 
he said in his great book, "As men's prayers are a 
disease of the will, so are their creeds a disease of the 
intellect." All his reverence for Jesus did not pre- 
vent his insisting that "The soul needs no persons," 
and that religious truth "cannot be received at second 
hand." Such sayings seem to be harmless truisms 
now, but they were terrible innovations fifty years ago. 
Even Unitarians were furious against the heretic ; but 

he went on his way serenely, until the Church caught 
up with" him. No opposition prevented his insisting 
that not only religious but political institutions were 
too often held sacred merely because they had come 
down from the past ; and he did a timely service to 
art and literature by declaring that their culture in 
America was too timid and too submissive to classic 
and European models. We may date the birth of a 
really American literature from the time when Emer- 
son said that it must be the daughter of liberty. 

His best work, I think, was in making the old in- 
tolerant form of religion, which hated new ideas, for- 
bade amusements, resisted philanthropy, and neglected 
moral duty, give place to one full of good works, 
friendly to reform, helpful to social pleasure, and hos- 
pitable towards new truth. Our popular religion has 
become philanthropic instead of intolerant, because it 
has caught new inspiration from Emerson, Parker, 
and other prophets of the Inner Light. 

It was because he was a prophet that Emerson 
was an iconoclast. He denied in order to affirm. To 
know what he affirmed, we have only to read Nature, 
the address at Divinity Hall, or the essay on "The 
Over-Soul." These and other pages written at least 
fifty years ago are bright and beautiful with words 
which no' one else could write. "The need was never 
greater of new revelation than now." " Religion is 
yet to be settled on its fast foundations in the breast 
of man." " Here . is the fountain of action and 
thought." "From within or from behind, a light 
shines through us upon things, and makes us aware 
that we are nothing, but the light is all." " O, my 
brothers, God exists! There is a soul at the centre of 
nature, and over the will of every man ; so that none 
of us can wrong the universe." " The league between 
virtue and nature engages all things to assume a hos- 
tile front to vice. " "All things are moral. . . . There- 
fore is nature glorious with form, color, and motion, 
that every globe in the remote heavens; . . . every 
change of vegetation, from the first principle of growth 
in the eye of a leaf, to the tropical forest and antedilu- 
vian coal mine ; every animal function from the sponge 
up to Hercules, shall hint or thunder to man the laws of 
right and wrong, and echo the ten commandments." 
"The world is nothing, the man is all : in yourself is 
the law of all nature." " In self-trust all the virtues 


are comprehended." "Every man . . . knows that to 
his involuntary perceptions a perfect faith is due." 
(The passages abridged are from Miscellanies, p. 38, 
and Essays I, p. 57.) 

These principles have transfigured religion, and 
made her pure and precious as she never was before. 
They have given us an original literature, full of life 
and strength, and taught our colleges the duty of en- 
couraging independent thought. At the darkest time 
in all our national history, when the authority of the 
Constitution and the Supreme Court, of both political 
parties, of all the great sects, and of the Bible itself, 
was appealed to in defence of slavery, then Emerson 
brought deliverance by announcing the superior au- 
thority of the Higher Law. It was the philanthropy 
of Transcendentalism, not that of Science nor of the 
Church, which freed the slaves. The Suffragists, too, 
have relied mainly upon intuitional conceptions of 
natural rights. Neither of these reforms was much 
aided by Emerson until after 1841, but even then, he 
made a suggestion which has not yet been adopted as 
completely as it should be in our schools. In his lecture 
on" Man the Reformer," he urges "the claims of manual 
labor as a part of the education of every young man," 
and adds "We must have a basis for our higher ac- 
complishments, our delicate entertainments of poetry 
and philosophy; in the work of our hands"; "not 
only health but education is in the work " ; " Manual 
labor is the study of the external world." 

Emerson's life was as beautiful as his thought; no 
one else was so highly honored in the village where 
he dwelt ; and my own reverence has made me slow 
to criticise. But we must remember that Theodore 
Parker, while preaching essentially the same philoso- 
phy as his friend, and declaring that there were "None 
who work so powerfully to fashion the character of the 
coming age," admitted the "actual and obvious con- 
tradictions in his works," which, he added, "do not 
betray any exact scholarship." "We sincerely lament, " 
said Parker in the Massachusetts Quarterly Review, 
"the want of logic in his method, and his exaggera- 
tion of the intuitive powers." " Some of his followers 
. . . will be more faithful than he to the false principle 
which he lays down and will think themselves wise 
because they do not study, . . . and inspired because 
they say what outrages common sense." The brief 
popularity of Fourierism was greatly aided by Emer- 
son's saying, in the famous Essays of 1841, "No man 
need be perplexed in his speculations. Let him do 
and say what strictly belongs to him, . . . though very 
ignorant of books." " Trust the instinct to the end, 
though you can render no reason. ... It shall 
ripen into truth." "We know truth when we see it." 
His highest authority was what he called the Reason, 
a purely intuitive power which, as he admitted. 

"never reasons, never proves." Parker complains 
that he " discourages hard and continuous thought." 
He opened the door for abolitionism, but it has also let 
in socialism, anarchism, spiritualism, mind healing and 
free coinage. Brownson stated, soon after his renun- 
ciation of Transcendentalism in 1844, that some Eng- 
lish adherents of that philosophy were trying to intro- 
duce the practice of free love, and that, sternly as 
Emerson and his friends denounced such a perversion 
of their system, " They cannot avoid this conclusion." 
He appeals to such passages as "The only right is 
what is after my own constitution ; the only wrong what 
is against it." "Our moral nature is vitiated by any 
interference of our will." "Our spontaneous action 
is always the best." " If the single man plant him- 
self indomitably on his instincts and there abide, the 
huge world will come round to him." 

We need not say with Brownson, that free love 
is " Transcendentalism in full bloom," or that it is the 
legitimate conclusion from Emerson's philosophy ; for 
that is so wide and vague as to make no practical 
conclusion more legitimate than any other. Emerson 
was neither more nor less consistent, when he came 
out plainly as an abolitionist in 1844, than when he 
yielded so far to his introspective tendencies as to de- 
clare in 1 841, " If I am just, then there is no slavery, let 
the laws say what they will." "Give the slave the 
least elevation of religious sentiment, and he is no 
slave." Zeal for reform could scarcely be expected 
of an optimist who thought 

" That night or day, that love or crime, 
Leads all souls to the Good " ; 

but philanthropy finally took the lead in his philoso- 
phy. Such were the fruits of the reaction from being 
guided badly by old Mother Church, into trying to 
dispense with all guidance or restraint, except that 
furnished from within. ^Ji"ifty years more have shown, 
not only that men still need guidance, but also that 
the true guide to duty is Science. Her value is much 
plainer now than when he first wrote ; and if her 
method is sufficient, his is outgrown. The spring in 
which he died was unusually backward ; and his favorite 
flower delayed so long to bloom as to call forth these 
lines : 

why did the Rhodora blossom so late, 

And the Spring keep back her flowers ? 
Did the May-day know of her poet's fate, 

And was Nature's grief like ours ? 
He came in a time of gloom and need, 

As a prophet of joyful May ; 
And he bade New England's wintry creed 

To a sunnier faith give way. 
His words were a flood of life and light 

which has burst that icy chain. 
And awaked a glory of blossoms bright 

with a promise of golden grain. 
The summer of thought draws near. 

Bringing truth hitherto unknown ; 
But the herald of spring is dear ; 

And the might of his work we own. 





From olden times, it has been thought that aduhs 
should be the teacliers and children simply learners, 
but in this Nineteenth Century of civilisation, the 
greatest find that they can learn from the little ones. 
The best educators are those who have learned most 
from little children and the most successful primary 
teachers are those who can see and feel things as chil- 
dren see and feel them. Authors of literature and 
text- books for children must now know child nature 
or fail. Scientific philologists are beginning to recog- 
nise the fact that children just learning to talk can 
teach them more about how languages are formed 
than can be learned by years of patient study of dead 
and living languages. Even the philosopher and 
ps3'chologist are turning to the child for the solution 
of some of the problems that have so long baffled 
them, and the practical moralist turns from theories 
to learn of children how moral ideas are formed and 
moral action called forth. While Carus Sterne has 
shown that they exercise a direct influence on their 

The development of the race is epitomised in the 
development of the child, and the observer may read 
it in the unfolding psychical activity of the innocent 
child with more pleasure and profit than in the learned 
histories of civilisation. 

Tiederman, Darwin, Taine, Alcott, Romanes, and 
other learned men have studied their own children 
scientifically, and taken notes on their development, 
while Perez, Kussmaul, and others have made observa 
tions on a number of children. Humphreys, Holden, 
and Noble have collected and examined the vocabu- 
laries of several children two years old, in order to dis- 
cover the general laws of speech. Emily Talbot has 
collected observations of mothers on young babes. The 
most thorough and accurate study has, however, been 
made by Preyer, who carefully observed and experi- 
mented upon his boy during the first three years of his 
life, noting down each day everything calculated to 
throw light upon the capacity of children and the or 
der of the development of their powers. Much light 
has been thrown on many subjects by these investi- 
gations, but a sufficient number of carefully verified 
facts has not yet been collected to enable us with cer- 
tainty to distinguish characteristics common to all from 
individual peculiarities. It has been made evident 
that not only must there be persevering exactness in 
observing and recording the facts, but that many of 
them can be accurately observed and correctly inter- 
preted only by one versed in physiology and psy- 

Considerable interest has been aroused and many 
plans proposed designed to increase scientific knowl- 

edge on the subject, to bring parents into new and 
pleasanter relations with each other and to preserve 
records of interest and value to the family. Probably 
no more acceptable or more valuable present could 
be given a child who has just attained his majority 
than a little book containing a record of his life from 
babyhood. The data contained in such a record would 
make it possible for him to obey the maxim, " Know 
thyself," and to guide himself by that knowledge, 
while the little incidents of childish life that give so 
much pleasure when remembered and related by the 
parents would be preserved and enjoyed by himself 
and his descendants. 

It will probably be years before the observations of 
many scientists on children can be collected, but, in 
the meantime, a father, mother, or older sister of or- 
dinary intelligence can by exercising patience and care 
observe and record certain facts of child development 
that will be as important and reliable as those fur- 
nished by the most learned scientist. These observa- 
tions, also, are those made at the most interesting age 
of the child's life, — the period of the development of 
speech. With a little care the mother can easily re- 
cord the development of language in her cunning lit- 
tle prattler, — an evolution as remarkable and full of 
interest as that traced by the philologist in the lan- 
guages of the various races in different ages, and 
throwing as much light on the origin of speech in 
man and the laws of its development. 

The one who will carefully make out a list of all 
the words now used by a child, and then carefully note 
down new words as they are learned, will secure facts 
of prime importance in the further development of 
psychology and pedagogy. The mote scientific stu- 
dent may be enabled to suggest still more fruitful 
lines and valuable methods of investigation in infant 

There are two principal things to notice in such a 
study, (i) the development of the power of articu- 
lating and (2) the development of the intellect ; hence 
it is necessary to keep two lists of words, one con- 
taining all words articulated by the child with indica- 
tions as to how they are pronounced, and the other 
all words used understandingly, those used only in 
direct imitation, only at sight of pictures in a book, or 
only from memory, as in nursery rhymes, being omit- 
ted from this hst. The first list would indicate the 
common difficulties encountered in learning to articu- 
late, and an examination of a sufficient number would 
make it possible to determine whether there really are 
any general laws of mispronunciation such as have 
been proposed. The second list would indicate the 
intellectual progress of the child as it learns new 
words and learns to use old ones with increasing ac- 
curacy and to put them together into phrases and sen- 



tences. Words that are invented by the child and 
those used in a sense different from the ordinary mean- 
ing are especially interesting and throw considerable 
light on the subject of how children classify and gen- 
eralise. A child who saw and heard a duck on the 
water called it "quack," and this word being thus as- 
sociated with the bird, and with the liquid upon which 
it rested, he therefore called all birds and all liquids 
"quack," and later seeing the eagle on a coin he 
called that and other coins "quack." The observing 
mother will note many similar peculiar yet natural uses 
of words by her little one who is getting acquainted with 
this complex world of ours and learning the strange 
language of its inhabitants. 

After the child's present vocabulary has been ob- 
tained as accurately as possible, its further progress 
can easily be recorded by noting down, in alpha- 
betical order, the words learned in each succeed- 
ing month. On the backs of the sheets contain- 
ing the vocabulary for each month may be given the 
peculiar meanings attached to words, the earlier at- 
tempts at putting words together, the later sentences 
of interest, especially those showing the characteristic 
grammatical errors, and any other items of interest. 
Such lists of words kept from the time a child begins 
to talk until he is three years of age could not fail to 
give interesting and more or less important results, 
and a comparison of a number of vocabularies of chil- 
dren under three years of age, such as could be ob- 
tained by a few months of observation, would have a 
similar value. How much do the vocabularies of chil- 
dren in cities differ from those in the country or in 
villages ? What is the effect on the vocabulary of as- 
sociating with other children of nearly the same age ? 
What difference does ease or difficulty of pronuncia- 
tion have upon the adoption of words into the vocabu- 
lary, and what is the effect of special teaching by par- 
ents ? These are a few of the many interesting ques- 
tions that might be answered by such vocabularies, 
accompanied by the necessary information. Not- 
withstanding these various influences, many of the 
same words would probably be found in all of the 
vocabularies. I found 64 words used in common by 
four little girls two years of age. Besides the facts 
suggested above, the age and sex of the child, and the 
nationality of the parents should be sent with the rec- 

It is to be hoped that such observations by parents 
of children who are just learning to talk will soon become 
common. If those who have begun or will begin such 
observations will send me the record for several 
months, with any comments or suggestions they 
see fit, I shall be pleased to compare the records and 
make the results public. 

Those who intelligently and sympathetically study 

the intellectual and emotional development of the 
child from day to day will find it more interesting 
than any continued story, and will gain more knowl- 
edge of human nature than by reading the most vivid 
character delineations. 
Worcester, Mass. 



The article by Louis Belrose, Jr., in the Open 
Court of April 2d, on " Comte's Gospel of Wealth," 
introduces a topic which should have immediate and 
general consideration. The question is whether the 
Industrial Feudal System of the Monopolists shall re- 
place Our Republic and the republican institutions 
of our fathers, while the Roman Catholic church sys- 
tem takes charge of the religious, social and general 
interests of the people, under the rising oligarchies of 
the future. This was substantially the Polity which 
Comte projected, and it is the one now rapidly taking 
form, as is clearly pointed out in the able article re- 
ferred to. The question is. Will it be final ? Shall 
we have a repetition of the Catholic Regime and the 
Feudal System of the Middle Ages upon an industrial 
scientific and higher plane ? Comte thought there 
was no escape from it. As soon as war in the pro- 
gress of Civilisation was replaced by industry and 
Capital, the Capitalist and the Captain of industry 
merely replaced the Soldier and the Baron of the for- 
mer system. The Republic of equals, of well-to-do 
people, the Republic of Washington, Jefferson, and 
Jackson, gradually vanished. There is no civilisation 
of industry without capital, those who own and con- 
trol that control all. The census, and the articles of 
Thomas G. Shearman on our growing Plutocracy and 
the nascent Billionaire, give the true readings of the 
signs of the times. Gradually the conditions of the 
life of the many are passing into the hands of the few. 
In a similar way the rapid growth of the Roman 
Catholic Regime in the world of religion and social 
affairs is equally manifest. It is amusing to notice how 
that Church assures the millionaire that he is "God's 
steward " and will get safe into heaven through the 
"eye of the needle," if he will only submit to and pay 
the Church ; then to the poor she is always the 
"Mother," Friend and Protector. Thus she holds 
both Plutocrat and Slave in her control as parts of 
the dispensation which keeps her as a necessity, and 
enables her to claim mediation between the two while 
using both. Without them her occupation would be 
gone. Comte, therefore consistently prophesied and 
re-instated the Catholic Regime upon laws and dog- 
mas of science, when the theological dogmas should be- 
come no longer credible, as an inevitable necessity of 
the new Feudal System. As Dr. Congreve teaches, 



we are to have Positivism, i. e. Catholicism, minus 
theology and plus science. 

It is now about a quarter of a century since this 
Comtean PoHty came over the Atlantic as the alleged 
outcome of the positive science and religion of man- 
kind. Many of the open minds and hearts of the 
more aspiring students of sociology in America, and 
especiall}' in New York, gave this new Gospel a 
thoughtful consideration. There was felt to be much 
of the highest value in Comte's Positive Philosophy, 
and much in his conception of a human religion, but 
this Polity was the stumbling-block over which there 
was no passing for many of us. We could see how 
the Philosophy and Religion could be revised and 
brought up to date truly and usefully. Under the in- 
fluence of Mr. D. G. Croly, then editor of the New York 
World, and Mr. Courtlandt Palmer, founder afterwards 
of the Nineteenth Century Club, both of whom have 
now gone over to the majority. Some of us attempted 
a Statement or Epitome of Positive Philosophy and 
Religion, of which a copy now lies before me, a sort 
of mile-stone in the history of our evolution. The 
point that makes it relevant to the present discussion 
is that it regards Comte's Polity of Aristocracy and 
Catholicism as a necessary but only a temporary phase 
of progress, and distinctly avows that the Utopia of the 
Future will be finally a re-integration of Plutocracy 
and Catholicism into some form of " Socialism" — 
a Republic of social industrialism, just as far removed 
from Comte's notion of an industrial Feudal System, 
as our Political Republic is, or rather was, removed 
from the castles and robbers of the Middle Ages. 
Just as the old Feudal System finally consolidated 
and ended in the modern royal dynasties of Europe ; 
France, England, Germany, etc., so surely the In- 
dustrial Feudal System of Monopolies can only end 
in their consolidation. Condensed capital, machin- 
ery and intelligence are seen to be irresistible. Will 
they ultimately and forever be controlled by a few 
Captains of Industry under the moral influence of a 
Catholic church ? The Frenchman, Comte, said Yes, 
but his American students have never been able to 
agree to that answer. The result was that Positiv- 
ism, or Constructive Liberalism, received a check in 
its hopeful progress from which it has never recov- 
ered, either in Europe or America. Herbert Spencer, 
then chiefly through the efforts of Prof. E. L. You- 
mans and the Appletons as publishers, took the lead of 
Liberal Thought, and held it against Comte's Catholi- 
cism, as he now holds it against Carl Marx's Socialism. 
But the question constantly recurs. What is our 
future Polity to be ? Mr. Spencer gives us agnostic 
Philosophy with frightful verbosity. But his religion, 
morality and, above all, polity — where and what are 
they ? It is plain enough that these four factors of 

the future must be settled together as parts of one 
mighty whole. Until we know to what port we are 
sailing — in a word, what is to be our future Polity — _ 
we are simply drifting without chart or compass. 
Nor if we, some of us, at least, have a pretty deep 
conviction as to the general nature of that polity, can 
we embark in ships plainly sailing under Comte's 
influence to a mirage of the Middle Ages, or under 
Spencer's to Monopolistic Feudality or Anarchy ? 

Is not the true line of evolution that which leads 
us to the supremacy of the people over the conditions 
of their comfort, welfare and civilization ? A Feudal 
System or a Monarchy cannot be made tolerable to 
the American People by any church or " spiritual 
power." But as pointed out by Mr. Belrose what 
else can we expect? We answer the continuance of 
our Republic, saved by gradually passing to the people 
the monopolistic powers that of old went to Lords 
and Kings, but which can never go to them again, or 
to corporations or a Plutocracy, in substance their 

If Sociology is a science, merely drifting without 
regard to our future is blind and wicked folly. For 
that future our religious, political, social and moral 
life is a preparation, or life has no end or object at all. 

If the solution we have intimated is not correct, 
let him answer better who can. 


This Italian question reminds me of the " foreign subject ' 
imposture, as it was practised in this country during the war. 
When the draft was ordered, regiments of patriots who for years 
had been conspicuous as hustlers and knockdowners at the polls, 
marched gallantly up to the office of the Provost Marshal, and 
claimed exemption on the plea that they were "foreign subjects" 
of all sorts of emperors, kings, and queens. They owed allegiance 
to every flag under the sun. excepting the American flag, and they 
"demanded " that their names be stricken from the lists. Public 
spirited fellows long eminent for skill in that branch of civil en- 
gineering which directs caucus machinery swarmed at the consu- 
lates clamoring for safety. In comic paradox appeared Hun- 
garians invoking the aid of Austria, Poles appealing to Russia, 
and fierce Fenians demanding the protection of the British flag. 
What is more wonderful still, they got it. The consuls knew that 
the United States could not afford to quarrel with other nations 
then, and with an air of imperious dictation they required that 
those "foreign subjects" be released from liability to service in 
the army. Some of those very same non-combatants went back 
to the old country, and when arrested for political offenses there, 
declared themselves to be citizens of the United States, claiming 
the protection of the American flag ; and what is most wonderful 
of all, got it. 

* -X- 

A new sect, or combination of sects, has appeared in England. 
It seems to be a rival of the Salvation Army, and is called the "Gos- 
pel Messengers." The officers, while having rank and grades like 
those of the Salvation Army, are known by other titles, having at 
least the merit of originality. The nicknames of honor which have 
amused our vanity so long, are thread-bare, and the Gospel Mes- 
sengers deserve praise for inventing another set. The officers of 
this new propaganda are Comets, Planets, and Stars, correspond- 



ing as nearly as may be to Colonels, Majors, and Captains. In- 
ferior to these are First Lights, and Second Lights, answering to 
First and Second Lieutenants, while below these again are a sort 
of Cadets, who are known as Coming Lights. There are no pri- 
vates in this army to dilute its quality ; the lowest grade in it be- 
ing that of Coming Light, a great improvement on some other 
armies I have known, Their temple of worship is called a " Ha- 
ven," which by the way, is more of a naval than a military term, 
and for musical torture they have a banjo and brass whistle, 
something more harrowing to the souls of sinners than even the 
tambourine and drum. Although but recently formed the new 
sect already has its martyrs, the chief of them being John Rout- 
ledge, a Sergeant of Police in London, who has been dismissed 
from the force because he had become a Comet, as erratic, though 
not so bright ; the excuse of his persecutors being that Comet 
Routledge was neglecting his duty as a policeman to blaze as a 
meteor in the gospel sky. Several years ago I was travelling down 
the Mississippi River in company with a gentleman who had seen 
much of the world, and as we passed Nauvoo he took off his hat 
and saluted the Mormon temple. I asked him why he did so, and he 
answered: " I salute every old religion, — and every new one, " and in 
that spirit I suppose we may welcome the "Gospel Messengers." 

The doctrine of international reciprocity has extended beyond 
the boundaries of commerce into the domain of ethics and re- 
ligion. For many years England has been sending missionaries 
to convert the heathen in foreign parts ; and now the heathen, in 
the gentle spirit of reciprocity, is returning the favor by sending 
missionaries to convert the Christians in England. The Nizam of 
Hyderabad, moved with pity for the benighted condition of the 
English people, and piously believing that their poverty and sins 
are due to Christian practices, has sent missionaries to convert 
them to the religion of Mahomet. He has done this at bis owh 
personal expense, and without taking up any collection. The re- 
port is made, although there is no harm in doubting it, that those 
missionaries are having greater success in England, than the Eng- 
lish missionaries ever had in Asia or in Africa. The head of the 
movement is an English lawyer named Quilliam, who was con- 
verted to Islamism several years ago. While Mr. Quilliam directs 
the missionaries where to plant the standard of the Crescent, the 
Nizam furnishes the funds. Sooner or later it must have come to 
this. The English could not for ever go on exporting their own 
religion to Hyderabad without importing some of the religion of 
that country in return. The principle of reciprocity required this 
to preserve the balance of trade, which in religion at least, had 
been for a hundred years largely in favor of England. She had 
exported so much religion to foreign parts that very little was left 
for home consumption ; and this movement of the Nizam will re- 
store the equilibrium. Should he succeed in improving the man- 
ners and condition of the English people, the Nizam will find a 
good field of operations for a few missionaries right here in the 
city of Chicago. If he could spare them now, and convert us in 
time for the World's Fair it would be so much the better. 
-X- -x- 

I give a welcome hail to the new nation just born in the South 
seas, "The Commonwealth of Australia." In extent of territory 
it is greater than the United States of America, and it contains 
more people than the United States had when Washington was 
elected President. While nominally, for the present, a part of the 
British empire, because it prefers to be so, it is essentially an in- 
dependent republic. In blood and spirit, in laws, language, relig- 
ion, history, and traditions, it is another England, founded by the 
descendants of those energetic tribes the Angles, Jutes, and Saxons, 
that strange confederation, prophecy of the United Slates, which 
in the woods and marshes between the Weser and the Baltic sea 
proved unconquerable by either Gauls or Romans ; a restless race 

who passing over to Britain in boats not much better than canoes, 
conquered that island, abolished its language, and changed the 
very name of it to Angleland. Overflowing that country, some of 
their posterity crossed the Atlantic, colonised North America, and 
created the political communities known as the United States and 
Canada, while another portion of them, a curious mixture of exiles 
and voluntary emigrants, occupied the great continent in the 
Southern Hemisphere, and as a sign of their latest conquest, pro- 
claim the new nation " The Commonwealth of Australia." The 
Constitution is said to be modelled partly on that of the United 
States, and partly on that of Canada. No matter, constitutions 
grow ; even the Constitution of the United States, with all its 
conservative precautions against its own amendment, has been 
amended fifteen times in the space of a hundred years, and the 
Constitution of Australia will be changed as often to meet the re- 
quirements of new conditions and the demands of human progress. 

Like a journey through a famous land, or a voyage up a mighty 
river, to the philosophical student is the charm of traveling by the 
aid of history up the devious pathway of an ancient people to con- 
template the landmarks of their glory. Still greater is the pleasure 
of anticipating the achievements of a new nation for the coming 
thousand years. There are wise persons in Chicago, I see their 
advertisements in the papers, who can tell our fortunes, good or 
evil, for a dollar. They do it by a knowledge of the planets, but 
who shall cast the horoscope of a nation ? What system of astrology 
can do that ? This prescience is not given even to the genius of the 
stars. Yet we would like to lift the veil that hides the future, and 
see the noonday of Australia. We can speak for the present at 
least, and say that the young commonwealth starts with a bodily 
and mental constitution healthy and strong ; and with some ad- 
vantages which no other nation has had. She has all the expe- 
rience of the older nations, with only a limited share of the conse- 
quences resulting from their vices, their misfortunes, and 'their 
trials. Her people will be homogeneous, and the race question 
will not vex them. There will be no " Negro Problem " in that 
new country to divide the citizens and perplex their politics. Aus- 
tralia is too remote for war with any of the older nations, and will 
save the cost of armies. Not having to study the politics of war 
her mental powers can be employed in moral statesmanship, and 
in learning the ethics of law. Her penal code will be merciful, 
for in her time of anger Australia will remember that among the 
founders of her greatness were men whose fathers had been trans- 
ported in chains from England, many of them for misfortunes 
which the law called crimes. If Australia has borrowed some 
parts of the American constitution it is only a fair exchange, be- 
cause many of the states of the American Union have borrowed 
the election law of Australia, and all of them must do so if the 
will of the people is to be fairly recorded and loyally obeyed. Out 
of her education will come Shakespeares and Schillers, Newtons 
and Franklins, poets, philosophers, statesmen, inventors, greater 
perhaps than any the old world has yet made in its weary evolution 
of man. Her territorial sway will be imperial for the natural re- 
sources of Australia are greater than those of any other nation, 
save the United States alone ; and perhaps they will be found equal 
to these when the explorations are all done. Advance, Australia ! 

M. M. Trumbull. 



To Ihe Editor of The Open Court : 

When I illustrated man's relation to the universe by the 
hands of a clock, the regulator was included as a part of the works 
which move the hands rhythmically. Man is like the hands of a 
clock because he is subject to the laws of his organisation. As he 



is organised so must he express himself, and that is why men dif- 
fer one from another. They are different instruments with but 
one performer. Because we can carry out some things that we 
wish, that does not prove that we are free ; it only shows that we 
have no opposing environment. Because the hands of the clock 
meet with no obstacles it does not prove that they are free ; they 
are subject to the mechanism which the clock-maker combined to 
move them. So man, in all that he does, is subject to the mech- 
anism of the combination which was combined by the great clock- 
maker of us all. The clock did not make itself, neither did man 
make himself. A clock that is not properly balanced needs a reg- 
ulator. It is the same with man. Being vicious by nature, and 
vicious in degree, his regulators are his opposing environments — 
the laws of church and state. If a clock is properly balanced and 
needs no regulator, the hands are not free but still are forced to 
move by perfect works. It is so with man : If he acts morally 
without an opposing environment he so acts because he has an 
organism that forces such an expression. Such an one will be re- 
pelled by an immoral environment and an immorally organised 
man will be repelled by a moral surrounding. 

I accept the definition, that " determinism teaches that willing 
is determined by law " and that is why I declare the will is not 
free. When I use the term law I mean cause. There are two 
things, therefore, law and will. Man cannot will without a cause. 
He wills to remain where there is attraction and he wills to leave 
where there is repulsion ; and the attractive and repulsive forms of 
matter have to be there as apart of the combination of his actions, 
or he would not will one way or the other; he would be like the gov- 
ernor when not belted and pullied to the crank-shaft. I must take 
ground agamst the statement that ' ' Nature is not the slave of 
law." " Nature acts in a certain definite way," because it \s forced 
to act that way. I make this statement from the standpoint of 
reason. Nature cannot make a planet revolve both ways at once, 
nor travel both ways in its orbit at the same time. A man is a slave 
when he must work at his master's bidding ; so Nature is a slave 
when it must work at the bidding of its master, the impossible. 
The magnet must point to the north because it is conditioned to 
point that way. Demagnetize the metal and Nature can't make it 
point toward the north. 

I cannot accept the term " man's own will," because that would 
destroy monism. Man does not possess anything that is his own. 
All that he has Nature has loaned him, and makes him pay it back. 
His will is not his own any more than the governor is the engine's. 
Monism cannot contemplate man as independent of Natural Law, 
nor can the thing formed resist the combination of the former ; it 
must act as it is conditiinicJ \ theje is no miracle in Nature. A 
man free from natural law would be a miracle. Herein is man 
cleared from the charge of rebellion against his maker, and that 
justification comes from science, not religion. 

I perfectly understand your definition of freewill : When a 
man acts without any obstacle in his environment — when he car- 
ries out his desire — you say he is free and is not under law. Here 
is where I beg to differ, because he, like the hands of the clock, is 
subject to the works which Nature endowed him with, the same 
as the hands of the clock are subject to the works which the 
clock-maker endowed // with. You give no credit for the natural 
causes within man which force him to express himself as he does. 
In the order of evolution man cannot react back upon the Power 
that evolves him step by step. Herein is hope and comfort for 
all mankind. Religion has taught that folly, but it is the function 
of science to stamp it out. Professor Clifford is no credential for 
proof. Men speak as they are organized. The credential to an 
assertion must come from Nature, and as there is no effect in Na- 
ture without a cause, man cannot act free from natural law. The 
prime cause of his every action is where the balance of Power is 
— either in the organism or in the environment. John Maddock. 

[I have to protest against Mr. Maddock's presentation of my 
view, that " when a man acts without any obstacle in his environ- 
ment, ... he is not under law." Man's actions are always ac- 
cording to law. I accept Determinism unreservedly. 

[I object to Mr. Maddock's expressions that a man who acts 
as he wills is a slave of law, that man is subject to the laws of his 
organisation, that as he is organised so he must express himself, 
and that nature is a slave of law. All these expressions contain 
the dualism of law and reality. As a man is organised so he is. 
What is man aside from bis organisation? Nature acts in a defi- 
nite way, and a man of a certain character (being a part of na- 
ture) acts also in a definite way. There is no law imposed upon 
nature ; law (i. e. uniformity) is a feature of nature. 

[Mr. Maddock says "that when I use the term law I mean 
cause." I do not use "law" and "cause" as synonyms; law 
being a uniformity of nature, and cause some motion that produces 
a change. 

[I have repeatedly called attention tovthe error that lies hidden 
in the expression "laws govern"; the laws of nature are not 
ukases imposed upon nature. Objectively considered, they are 
uniformities of nature, and subjectively considered, i. e. regarded 
as generalised statements formulated by science, they do not gov- 
ern, they describe. 

[If I speak of " man's own will," I do not mean to attribute to 
man any independence of nature. "Man's own will" is a term 
describing nature's action as it takes place in man. The power 
that produced man is not outside of man as a clock-maker is out- 
side of the clock ; it is in him and he is a part of it.— Ed.] 

To the Editor of The Open Court : 

I am interested in the freewill discussion, and in a conver- 
sation with Mr. Maddock, I found out that he by no means con- 
siders that his position cannot be moved. I think, however, that 
we can come to an understanding on this matter if we will only 
agree on a statement of the question. 

Mr. Maddock, in our conversation, took for illustration a hun- 
gry man and a dinner. He says that I must eat my dinner because 
of the laws which control my organisation and that I cannot will 
otherwise, therefore my will is not free. I think Mr. Maddock 
must agree that the will comes with the organisation condition 
and did not exist until it did. The will and the organisation con- 
dition are one. For instance, special conditions of reality bring 
about a special organisation (in this case man), and with this special 
organisation comes special organisation conditions ; but those or- 
ganisation conditions are not entities in themselves ; the organisa- 
tion and the condition are one. Take away either and neither 
remains. It cannot be said one is the slave of the other, for they 
are one. There is no more duality than there is between the two 
sides of the curved line, although one side is concave and the other 
side is convex. 

So with organisation conditions comes will. The organisa- 
tion conditions are not laws controlling a will which is something 
separate. Mr. Maddock may say " I want you to will that you 
are not hungry, but you are hungry and you cannot will that you 
are not." Yes, I am hungry, (this is the way I symbolise my 
organisation condition) and he asks me to not only change my will 
but my organisation with its conditions; then he says "If you 
cannot, you are not free." How can I be and still not be ? 

The special conditions of all reality that brought about my 
special organisation with its conditions exist no longer — they are 
me, so they do not control me. Of course, I am a part of all 
reality and cannot be exempt from all reality condition. I and 
reality with its condition are one, however. 

Thus we see that all specials are reduced to generals, and 
those generals are generalised until they reach the one complete 

2 794 


generalisation. The trouble is that although we claim to be 
monists we are not. Reality and the order of reality are one. 
Law is a symbolical expression of this observed order. 

Leroy Berrier. 
Minneapolis, Minn. 


The Mystery of New Orleans. (Philadelphia : J. B. Lippin- 
cott Company.) This is a novel by Dr. Wm. H. Holcombe of 
New Orleans. The plot is unessential. The idea is "to illustrate 
the new discoveries in physio-psychology . . . ; to throw a little 
helpful light upon the race-problem ; and to cultivate friendly 
sentiments between the North and South." Something is also said 
about vivisection, in strong condemnation of it. The author's chief 
conceptions are based on the results of scientific research in the 
domain of psychological science. That is they are ostensibly based 
on these results. But we know of no scientific investigations which 
support Dr. Holcombe in the mystical extension he has made of 
his data. In fact, all theories of "psychic ethers," "reflection of 
thought by mental mirrors," etc., etc., which make thought a sub- 
stance, and moreover any kind of a substance to stiit the purpose, do 
not need the support of the investigations of science. Not being 
based on facts they can be established just as well and just as 
solidly without facts. Only their solidity is limited, in this case, 
to their metaphorical character. For the rest, they are merely 
ideas mistakenly applied to provinces where they do not belong. 

We have received the new catalogue and prospectus of the 
Princeton Preparatory School at Princeton, N. J. The curriculum 
of this institution, which is under the competent and wise adminis- 
tration of Mr. John B Fine, Head-Master and Instructor in Latin 
and Mathematics, extends over a period of four years, and em- 
braces a number of courses of thorough instruction in the English 
Branches, the Classics; Mathematics, Science, History, and the 
Modern Languages. The extension of the courses in science and 
mathematics, usually very meagrely represented in preparatory 
schools, is to be much commended. 

77/1' Upper Ten. A Novel of the Snobocracy. By W. H. Ballon. 
(New York : United States Book Company.) This is a short and 
entertaining novel, "of a new type of fiction," as the author says — 
namely the submarine type. It partakes of its type — is watery in 
some parts and sparkles in others with a deep-sea, cerulean-green 
wit. Some happy satirical hits are made at the society of the 
American metropolis, and the volume (paper-bound) is inter- 
spersed with some very pretty verses. 

We have received from the Rough Notes Publishing Co. of 
Indianapolis their last annual Digest of Insurance Cases (brought 
down to Nov. i, 1890). This publication is compiled by Mr. 
John A. Finch and epitomises, professedly, all the decisions of the 
courts relative to insurance cases and all the leading articles writ- 
ten on this vast subject. The present volume contains digests of 
three hundred and seventy-one cases. 


Mr. Wakeman has presented the Brooklyn Ethical Associa- 
tion with an excellent contribution to their Evolution Series. It 
is his lecture on Ernst Haeckel, which tells us of Haeckel's life 
and work. The pamphlet contains as a frontispiece a neatly re- 
produced picture of Haeckel. Mr. Wakeman concludes his lec- 
ture in the following words: "When the old religions fall, what 
' ' will you give in their place ? We answer, Ke/igion ! Look around ! 
"The enchanted castle of existence of the past was but a half- 
" seen, discolored prophecy of the truth which is replacing it, with 
"a grandeur and a reality that terrifies the soul at first. People 

" are frightened when science tells them that this world is the real 
"one, and 'the other ' its shadow. But this true world includes 
"all — is The All! It brings with it a new philosophy, religion, 
"morality, life, and motive, which is an enduring well-spring of 
"energy, consolation, and hope — not of pessimism nor optimism, 
"but of ever-victorious meliorism. Do not as an ethical society 
"fear that the old moral lights will be blown out and darkness 
" result. The true scientific foundation will replace the old, as in 
"our cities the scientific electric light has come to take the place 
" of the old smoky lamps. To secure such replacement, through- 
"out the whole individual and social domain of human affairs, is 
"the motive and inspiration of those scientists who, in Europe 
"and America, put their conclusions before the people in the sim- 
' ' plest language, yet ever eloquent with these new purposes and 
" hopes. Of the noblest of such teachers and prophets none stands 
"forth more prominently than Ernst Haeckel. From his con- 
" eluding words at that Munich contest rings out the motto which, 
" in a word, expresses the impulse of his own life, and of the crea- 
' ' tive era of the new faith of Monism : Iinpavidi progrediaiiiiir ! 
" ' Undaunted we press ever on !'" 




Bv Dr. Paul Carus. 

480 Pages, with 152 Illustrative Cuts and Diagrams. — PRICE $3.00. 
Printed on Extra-fine Paper, Handsomely Bound in Cloth. 




8a. 00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 



CHILDREN AS TEACHERS. E. A. Kirkpatrick 27S9 

OUR FUTURE POLITY. T. B. W.^keman 2790 

CURRENT TOPICS. Foreign Subjects. The Gospel Mes- 
sengers. Reciprocity in Religion. The Commonwealth 

of Australia. Gen. M. M. Trumbull 2791 


Law and the Freedom of Will. John Maddock and Le- 
roy Berrier. [With editorial note.] 2792 


NOTES '• 2794 



The Open Court 

A. \Ai'EEk:ly journal 

Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion with Science. 

No. 193. (Vol. v.— II 

CHICAGO, MAY 7, 1891. 

[ Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



There is a book much spoken of called the " Kreu- 
tzer Sonata," and written by the Russian, Count Tol- 
stoi'. The authorities of various countries have done 
their part to advertise the book by prohibiting it. Af- 
terwards the injunctions were removed and thus offi- 
cially everything was done to promote a work unrivaled 
in revolutionary spirit. 

Well, then, what is written in this Kreutzer So- 
nata? The Kreutzer Sonata has the form of a novel ; 
it teaches that man should live as chaste a life as 
woman, and that she has the same right as he to ex- 
pect purity of him at the day of marriage. And that 
is right ! Secondly it teaches that husband and wife 
should live their married life in chastity, that accord- 
ing to Christ, it is adultery even for the husband to 
look on his wife to lust after her. Married people 
should live like brother and sister. Lastly it is written 
in the Kreutzer Sonata that sexual love is not neces- 
sary by nature, it can and must be suppressed ; and 
that in this way the human race will have to be dis- 
continued. These being the main ideas, Tolstoi' tells 
us the story of an unhappy marriage such as has 
often been told and represented on the stage. 

There is danger of ridicule, should we take an 
author seriously who says something in jest. Yet Tol- 
stoi' is bitterly in earnest with his doctrines, as can be 
readily felt by the feverish excitement that pervades 
the whole book. 

Tolstoi' is a naturalistic poet ; he does not write a 
work of art in the old sense of the word. The natur- 
alistic poet proposes problems without solving them. 
He brings conflicts to a climax without explaining 
them. He complains and finds no comfort ; he ac- 
cuses and knows no remedy. You say, we all of us 
can do that ; for that we need no poets. And in addi- 
tion, if a naturalist makes a proposition, it is unprac- 
tical and unrealisable. 

It is strange that the naturalist Tolsto'i ventures 
upon an idealism which is scarcely, if eVer, found in 
fairy-tales. He proposes to abolish the natural rela- 
tion between man and woman because it sometimes 
causes mischief. It is right to pour away the dirty 

» Translated from the Heimgarten. a Gem 
of the present article is the editor. 

nthly of which the autho 

water, but it is not right to pour out the child together 
with the bath, and still less to do away with marriage 
and children together. The abolition of love is some- 
thing new. The Russian has outdone Oriental and 
Romance imagination. But he claims Schopenhauer's 
authority in his favor. And that settles it ! 

The poet declares that sensual love is contrary to 
humanity and marriage to Christianity. A Christian 
should not marry. 

It little behooves a critic to say of a poet he has 
grown old. Yet we can boldly tell the Count Tolstoi' 
to his face that he has grown old, the more so as we 
can remind him of his younger years. He has praised 
love and founded a happy family life. 'What he says 
in his Kreutzer Sonata is only an ingenious whim of 
the theorising old man. I see no chance of a milder 
condemnation of the book. 

The book, however, has another side which is not 
so harmless as his philosophical speculation on love. 
Tolsto'i describes the married life of a couple, the hus- 
band being coarse and sensuous and the wife without 
a heart. Their marriage naturally is in the highest 
degree unhappy and ends in murder. Such things 
happen. Yet if the poet thinks that it is the typical 
marriage, the rule, and a common occurrence, he in- 
sults humanity. 

It is a most significant error of our present con- 
ception of marriage, that we suppose that two people 
of different sex marry in order to satisfy in a legal way 
their sexual instincts. If that were the end to be at- 
tained, it could be accomplished without marriage. 
There are weightier reasons for marriage. There is 
the sympathy between two people, the harmonious 
communion of souls, the wants of the heart to confide 
in another with whom it will be easier to bear life's 
joys and tribulations ; with whom there are common 
interests for a whole long life — these are the real and 
decisive reasons for marriage. 

It may be maliciously objected, if that were so, 
two men or two women might marry and marriage 
would be friendship only. But this objection will not 
in the least disturb me ; for certainly marriage must 
be friendship. If marriage is not a bond of friendship, 
it is immoral in the highest degree. Yet in order to 
be a bond of friendship for the whole life until death 
doth part it, it must be so intimate as to make of two 



spheres of interest one world with all joys and tribu- 
lations in common, including the satisfaction of all 
wants and also those of the sexual instinct. It must 
be a partner from whom you can expect posterity, so 
as to continue to live through him or her beyond the 
grave. The sexual side of marriage, in itself the basis 
of it, becomes, when humanly and socially considered, 
a subordinate feature ; the most important part will 
always remain the moral relation, the bond of friend- 
ship, the exchange of souls between husband and 

What is fidelity? Is it only a faithful preservation 
of the body? A friend is false who betrays me, who 
misuses my confidence, who injures me, whose good- 
will is not reliable. Thus a woman can be false with- 
out committing herself otherwise, and this lack of 
fidelity can be extremely grave. 

The Kreatzer Sonata has been read by one-half of 
the civilised world. But the book cannot make a 
lasting impression, for its ideas are impractical and do 
not take into consideration the human and moral side 
of the question. 

It is almost coarse for a poet if he entirely over- 
looks — as Tolstoi does in his Kreutzer Sonata — the 
moral feature and the moral strength of man. Be- 
tween the two people whom he introduces as an ex- 
ample of modern marriage, there is no other commun- 
ion than animal sensuality and diabolical hatred. They 
are brutal, hypocritical without heart, without soul, 
without goodwill, without sympathy, without intellect- 
ual interests, without almost anything human or hu- 
mane — such are the heroes of his novel, and with such 
characters he attempts his demonstration. 

Had Tolstoi' not generalised, had he presented the 
story as one special case, the effect would have been 
great. For these two people are represented most 
admirably and true to life. The husband's jealousy 
and its tragic result cannot be described with more 
psychological truth and thrilling vigor. The heart of 
the reader is overcome as though by a thunder- 

But then he is told : Look to it dear reader, you 
also are of this kind; you also have been in your youth 
a coarse roui ; you also have married your wife as 
one buys a slave ; you keep her as one keeps a chattel 
for pleasure's sake ; you torture her with senseless 
jealousy and some day you will kill her. Will the 
reader not throw the book intr the author's face and 
shout : What right do you hav; to insult me in this 
way — me as well as the great .najority of my fellow- 
men ? 

Or, perhaps, are matters really as bad as that? 

I ask, are matters really as bad as Tolstoi makes 
us believe? Does marriage instead of elevating man 
degrade him below the animal? If that be so, I beg 

the poet's pardon and ask him the next time to be 
much severer with that infernal race whose malignity 
is without bounds. Would it then not be advisable 
to turn the evolution of mankind backward? 

Among the peasantry there are scoundrels also, 
but they are — as Tolstoi himself confesses — excep- 
tions, for the peasantry are too hard oppressed to be 
bad. An aged peasant once said to me : "The old 
woman there is my best comrade," and this simple 
word expresses a truth which has not found room in 
Tolstoi's world -despising novel. It is a truth which 
criticises the opinion of and should be regarded by those 
married people of the modern fashion or the author of 
the Kreutzer Sonata himself. 



In the Forum for August, Mrs. Stuart Phelps has 
an article entitled "The Decollete in Modern Life." 
Her object is to call public attention to a vicious 
practice common among ladies in fashionable life, 
the tendency of which is to corrupt both sexes in that 
class, and thus indirectly the whole of the community 
in which they live. Mrs. Phelps seems to have writ- 
ten this article from a strong conviction of the perni- 
cious character of the practice in question, and from 
a sense of duty in confronting the unpleasant conspic- 
uousness of taking the first step toward its removal. 
Her desire was to call attention to public indecencies 
which have become common and popular, and to do 
this in decent language. But an embarrassing diffi- 
culty soon occurred. She was about to give an actual 
instance of the fault in question, that no mistake 
might be made about her meaning, but paused, say- 
ing, " My pen shrinks from writing what this high- 
bred lady does.'' A lady, too, whom she describes as 
" otherwise immaculate," and as belonging to one of 
the best families. 

I am reminded here of two cases in which my own 
attempts to call attention to notorious public inde- 
cencies, with the hope of inciting efforts for their re- 
moval, were counteracted by that false delicacy which 
leaves enormous evils to run their course triumph- 
antly, to avoid the unpleasantness of plainly describ- 
ing them. One of these cases was the refusal of six 
of the most respectable papers in Boston to publish 
an article in which I had called attention to the cor- 
rupting influence of the ballet, and of the accompany- 
ing dances by single female performers in the Boston 
theatres. These newspapers habitually praised the 
performers, but thought it indecent to describe ex- 
actly what they did, even for the purpose of checking 
their evil influences upon the community. 

The other case I had in mind was my competition, 
more than half-a century ago, for a prize offered by a 



pious and worthy gentleman for the best tract of 
twelve pages on " The Family Relation as affected by 
Slavery." My tract was accepted, but with an objec- 
tion that portions of it were ' ' too naked, " and a requi- 
sition that those portions should be omitted. Thus 
it happened that in a work, the express object of 
which was to expose some vicious characteristics of 
slavery, a specification of the very worst of those fea- 
tures was suppressed, because the would-be reformer 
shrank from putting into words, even words of con- 
demnation, a description of the things habitually done 
by respectable and pious people, and known to be so 
done, and known to be expressly authorised by exist- 
ing State laws and Church customs, showing both 
State and Church to be participants in the guilt of 
those abominable practices. Was it really better to 
leave those worst abuses to flourish undisturbed than 
to shock prudish sensibilities by such open declaration 
of them as was the needful preliminary to their sup- 
pression ? 

To return to Mrs. Phelps's article. That the prud- 
ishness above hinted at dominates that estimable lady, 
is shown by her attack upon Tolstoi at the close of 
her article. She testifies respecting his last published 
work(evidently "The Kreutzer Sonata") that it is 
"true" and "well-meant," and that its author "has 
certainly moral motives of a very high and noble or- 
der. " After such characterisation of the book and 
the author as that, how strange is it to hear Mrs. 
Phelps rebuke him, call on him henceforth to keep si- 
lence, and say, "His unpardonable fault is one of 
literary taste." She admits the existence of the gross 
immorality which Tolstoi' describes as habitual and per- 
mitted in Russia, but seems to assume that to suffer 
its continuance without protest is better than to shock 
the delicacy of the pure minority by such plain de- 
scription as shall compel attention to the vices in 
question, and prompt to active efforts for their re- 
moval. Is not this a specimen of preference for mere 
outside cleansing of the cup and platter ? 

The vices in question, I have said. For although 
Tolstoi' begins with condemnation of the very fault 
which Mrs. Phelps attacks in this country, moved 
obviously by feelings and motives like her own, he 
goes on to describe and rebuke other vicious cus- 
toms in Russia. These evil practices exist also here, 
and need to be pointed out and stigmatised here, 
as the indispensable means of arousing opposition to 
them. The very reason why well-known abuses in 
the sexual department prevail and continue here is be- 
cause so many of the better sort "shrink" from open 
speech and action against them. Here, as in Russia, 
gross and shameful ill-treatment of women is habit- 
ually practiced by men accounted not only respectable 
but cultured, refined, and pious. This fact, no doubt. 

increases the difficulty of effective remonstrance. All 
the more ought we to recognise and be grateful for 
the benefit which Tolsto'i has conferred on the half- 
civilised world by disregarding "literary taste" in 
comparison with moral, religious and social reform. 
New England not less than Russia or ancient Pales- 
tine needs the voice of one crying in the wilderness 
against abuses which long custom and a vicious the- 
ology have seemed to sanctify. Very many of the men 
ranked among " our best classes " may see themselves, 
as in a glass, in the Kreutzer Sonata ; and they ought 
not only to read it, but to mark, learn, and inwardly 
digest it. 

Tolsto'i's book, called "The Kreutzer Sonata," is 
very much spoken against, and indeed it has great 

In the first place, it is very strange that an author 
who holds intense and peculiar ideas about moral 
and social reform should choose to present them 
to the public through a character so extravagant and 
fantastic as that of Posdnicheff. Tolsto'i evidently rec- 
ognises much defect and much error in the popular 
ideas of civilisation, and religion, and considers it his 
duty to attempt their rectification. Judging for him- 
self what is right, according to the precept of Jesus, 
and penetrated with the conviction that he is bound to 
diffuse the truth he has received, he attacks, unre- 
servedly and fearlessly, some of the vicious practices 
which he asserts to be common and permitted in Rus- 
sian society, the highest as well as the lowest. To 
attempt a work of reform is not a rare thing ; but this 
man's work is especially noteworthy in that some of 
the customs there represented as unjustifiable and 
pernicious are such as the male half of the community 
everywhere assume to be not only lawful but right, 
falling within their masculine prerogative, and forti- 
fied by such antiquity of respectable usage that the 
memory of man runneth not to the contrary. Nay, 
the pious people who indulge in the practices here 
condemned will quote scripture in their defense as 
confidentl}' as our Mormons do for their peculiarities. 
Under such circumstances, an author who feels obliged 
to condemn customs sanctioned by the popular re- 
ligion as well as by respectable social custom has a 
hard task before him, and should present his case in 
a cautious and prudent manner, taking special care to 
avoid overstatement. It is strange then, I say, that 
Tolsto'i should have presented his reformatory ideas 
through the mouth of a person like Posdnicheff, not 
only headstrong, extravagant and ill- balanced, but 
maddened by jealousy. He has however chosen this 
method ; and our part is, first to judge which of his 
accusations is well grounded, and then so to examine 
ourselves as to find whether we lie under the same 



The chief aim of "The Kreutzer Sonata" is to 
compel men to consider the rights and duties of hus- 
bands and wives in marriage. The subjects of mar- 
riage and divorce have of late been very prominent in 
periodical literature, both in England and in this coun- 
try. But Tolstoi' goes beyond all the magazines and 
reviews in the extent and the boldness of his criticism. 
His peculiarity, theologically, is an attempt to show 
that the teaching of Jesus, in its plain and obvious 
meaning, should be our rule of life, both for individuals 
and societies. 

In previous books Tolstoi' had enjoined non-resist- 
ance to injury, the return of good for evil in all cases, 
indiscriminate almsgiving, and abstinence from the 
taking of oaths and the accumulation of property; 
claiming that the obvious meaning of Jesus in regard 
to these matters should be accepted as law by those 
who call him Lord and Master. But in "The Kreut- 
zer Sonata" he makes a special plea for the duty of 
chastity, not only urging its observance upon both 
sexes but claiming for it a significance not generally 
recognised. He insists that the gospel prohibition to 
men of sexual desire towards women was intended to 
apply "notably and especially" to their own wives, 
and that sexual intercourse, after pregnancy is estab- 
lished, is a wrong and an outrage, injurious to both 
mother and child. He might have gone further, and 
represented that the passage in question forbids also 
the sexual desire which precedes marriage, and is one 
of the incitements to it. It is certain that the words 
of Jesus on that subject, taken in connection with his 
example, and the language of Paul and of the author 
of the book of Revelation give the impression, on the 
whole, that though marriage is permissible, perma- 
nent continence and celibacy are purer and more 

The ideas above-mentioned are those upon which 
special stress is laid in "The Kreutzer Sonata." But 
many other statements are confidently made by the 
narrator, Posdnicheff, some of which are not only 
questionable, but better suited to his character and 
circumstances than to those of the author. It remains 
true, however, that Tolsto'i here as in his previous 
books, has written from a strong conviction of duty, 
with an elevated moral purpose, and on a subject which 
needs plain and urgent speech, in the interest alike of 
civilisation, morality, and religion. The reformer who, 
for these purposes, braves such reproach as has been 
thrown upon the author of "The Kreutzer Sonata," 
deserves a candid hearing from other reformers, espe- 
cially from those who claim to be followers of the same 
Lord and Master. The books of Tolsto'i are far more 
accurate representations of what Jesus taught and en- 
joined than the sermons and commentaries of those 
who claim officially to represent him. 



" From curb'd licence pluck 
The muzzle of restraint, and the wild dog 
shall flesh his tooth in every innocent." 

— Khtg Henry IV, 

In the case of Sir Charles Dilke, who was compelled to aban- 
don his politicaLcareer because of alleged sexual immorality, and 
now in the attitude of Mr. Gladstone and his English and Irish 
coadjutors towards their fallen colleague, Mr. Parnell, we catch a 
breath of the new ethic of the sexes, equality of virtue. The days 
of high aims and Pompadourism are no more. It may be said of 
the great men of to-day in morals what John Fiske says of the men 
of the day who have fully kept pace with scientific movements : 
" They are separated from the men of the past by an immeasur- 
ably wider gulf than ever before divided one progressive genera- 
tion of men from their predecessors." Lord Nelson and Lady 
Hamilton did their country eminent service, but, great as they 
were, their private immorality would at the present day prevent 
their crowding their drawing rooms with the wit and fashion of 
London. It is owing to virtue that we exist. In primeval times 
the tribes deficient in conjugal fidelity and addicted to polyandry, 
reared no children and were soon blotted out of the book of na- 

Although a high standard of virtue gives but a slight advantage 
to each individual over others, still the increase in the number of 
virtuous men and women gives an immense advantage to a nation, 
since at all times and throughout the world the tribes or nations 
which supplanted others, the one element in their success was 
their standard of morality. The Irish owe their indomitable cour- 
age and seven hundred years of struggle against foreign foes, who 
have never completely subjugated them, to their respect for virtue 
and chastity, and the fact that early marriages is the rule among 
them. Ireland, as Lord Macauley said in the House of Commons 
in 1844, is the home and perpetual nursery of heroes. Her men, 
as John Stuart Mill maintained, are Princes among men in every 
country but their own. And why ? Because heroes are, as history 
has shown, only begotten by virtuous men and women. Turkish 
rule began to totter the moment she was deprived of her Janizaries. 
These men who had fought her battles so bravely were the tribute 
children of Christians. Polygamy depresses mind, heart, and body, 
while the union of one man to one woman cemented by love flushes 
the whole organism with color, gives a higher pitch to our lives, 
and is imparted to our offspring. 

The northern barbarians, as the Romans called the Germanic 
races, when they first appeared on the historic stage had, accord- 
ing to Mommsen and Taine, the most exalted ideas of woman and 
the sex relations ; premature unions were forbidden and were pre- 
vented by infibulation. The Cimbri who first made the western 
world feel that Rome's Empire had begun to totter, when they 
first touched the orbit of ancient civilisation, marriage was pure 
among them, chastity instinctive ; the adulterer was punished by 
death, and the adulteress obliged to hang herself. 

When Gains Marius defeated the Cimbrians 103 B. C, their 
women showed as much courage as the men ; in size and strength 
they were little inferior ; tall and stately, with flaxen hair and 
blue eyes, they excited the admiration of the Romans, and when 
they fell into the hands of their enemies and could not obtain from 
Marius assurance of their chastity, they slew themselves with 
their own hands. 

Lecky in his " History of European Morals," says, " It is one 
" of the most remarkable and to some writers one of the most per- 
" plexing facts in the moral history of Greece that, in the former 
"and ruder period, woman had undoubtedly the highest place 
"and their type exhibited the highest perfection. The female 
"figures stand out on the canvas almost as prominently as the 



" male ones, and are surrounded by an almost equal reverence. . . 
"The whole history of the ' Siege of Troy ' is a history of the 
"catastrophes that followed a violation of the nuptial tie." 

But as some animals under domestication lose the instinct of 
pairing with a single mate, so does man whenever and wherever 
luxury and magnificence abound. Ease and luxury have the iden- 
tical blighting effect on the intellect and morals as extreme poverty. 
When Greece and Rome had to be either anvil or hammer, and 
when men to live had to fight there was little personal immorality. 
But when Greece had conquered her great enemy Persia and the 
Greek began to build himself fine houses and fill them with works 
of art, and when Rome was mistress of the world and had not an 
enemy whom she feared, then did their men seek the intoxication 
of vice and forgot the thrill of emotion which great achievements 
and great men inspire. 

Culture, in its broadest sense, reached a height in Greece in 
the fifth century before Christ, and in Italy in the fifteenth cen- 
tury after Christ, never before or since paralleled. The young 
man of talent and ambition who visited Athens in the time of Per- 
icles, listened to a political speech from that great man, then a 
lecture from Anaxagoras, after which he visited the studio of 
Phidias, then to see a new play of either Sophocles or Euripides, 
and he finished up his night at the establishment of Aspasia, where 
he heard Pericles and Thucydides discuss whether the latter had 
better devote his genius to poetry or history, or listened to music 
and the ballads of Sappho and Anacreon sung by the most beau- 
tiful and accomplished women in Athens, who were not the wives 
or daughters of the great men present, but women who had en- 
rolled themselves in the ranks of the hcticrae. 

We discover the same culture and magnificence in Italy in the 
closing days of Lorenzo the Magnificent. Italy, which had restored 
intellectual light to Europe, reconciled order with liberty, recalled 
youth to the study of laws and of philosophy, created the taste for 
poetry and the fine arts, revived the science and literature of an- 
tiquity, given prosperity to commerce, manufactures, and agricul- 
ture, fell like her ancient prototype Greece, an easy prey into the 
hands of the very barbarians whom she was leading to civilisation 
because all her republican energy and virtue had been crushed 
out by luxury and vice. Roderick Borgia, then Pope, was a fair 
type of the Florentine nobility. He was a man of immense wealth, 
utterly depraved in character and a most perfidious politician. 
His whole aim in life was personal power and to settle well his 
illegitimate children, of whom he had many. 

Up to the present day the sexual immorality of man has been 
due to a bankrupt public opinion. As John Stuart Mill points out 
in his " Utility of Religion," illicit sexual intercourse, which in 
both sexes stands in the very highest rank of religious sins, yet not 
being severely censured by public opinion in the male sex, they 
have in general very little scruple in committing it, while in the 
case of women, though the religious obligation is no stronger, yet 
being backed in real earnest by public opinion, is commonly effec- 

Some people suppose that no effective authority can be ob- 
tained over mankind without a belief in a supernatural religion, 
but the reflecting and well informed know better. As Mill said 
after reading Comte's "Positive Philosophy," which recognises 
no religion except that of Humanity, "this book leaves an irre- 
sistible conviction on your mind that any moral belief concurred 
in by the community generally may be brought to bear upon the 
whole conduct and lives of its individual members with an energy 
and potency truly alarming." 

We all know that we cannot be happy if we are despised and 
detested by our fellows. Society may not have the power to make 
us very happy but it certainly has the power of making us very 

As Bryce points out in his "American Commonwealth," the 

force of public opinion creates the views of individuals as well on 
political as on moral questions. In Vol. II. p. 211, he says. "In ex- 
amining the process by which public opinion is formed, we can- 
not fail to note how small a part of the views which the average 
man entertains when he goes to vole is really of his own making ; 
although he supposes his views to be his own, he holds them be- 
cause his acquaintances, his newspaper, and his party leader holds 

That men are commonly governed not by religious belief, but 
by the law of honor which is nothing more than the opinion of 
their equals, is seen in the fact that a breach of this law even 
when the breach is in accordance with true morality, has caused 
many a man more agony than a real crime. George the Second 
adored his wife. Queen Caroline, he thought her, in mind and 
person the most attractive of her sex, but he thought that con- 
jugal fidelity was an unprincely virtue and in order to be like 
Henry IV and the Regent of Orleans he affected, as Macaulay 
says, a libertinism for which he had no taste, and frequently 
quitted the only woman he really loved for ugly and disagreeable 

The struggle for virtue like the struggle for existence must 
now be used in a wide sense including the dependence of one be- 
ing upon another, and as in the animal world the struggle for life 
is most severe between individuals of the same species who fre- 
quent the same districts and require the same food, and are ex- 
posed to the same dangers, so in the case of man and woman, 
having the same appetites and passions, frequenting the same 
places and exposed to the same temptations, they should afford 
each other mutual protection 

Paradoxical as it may seem, it is owing to man's selfishness 
and compulsion that woman owes her more highly developed 
virtue. As Winwood Reade has shown in his "Martyrdom of 
Man," women from their earliest childhood are subject by the 
selfishness of men to severe but salutary laws, and chastity be- 
comes .the rule of female life. At first it was preserved by force 
alone, but, after a time women became the guardians of their own 
honor, and regarded and treated the woman as a traitor to her 
sex who betrayed her trust. It is certainly, as he says, an extra- 
ordinary fact that women should be subject to a severe social dis- 
cipline, from which men are almost exempt. But it is not the 
women who are to be pitied ; it is they alone who are free, for by 
that discipline they are prevented from the tyranny of vice. The 
passions are always foes, but it is only when they are encouraged 
that they are able to become masters, and no calculus can inte- 
grate the number of intellects that have been paralyzed, innocent 
hearts that have been broken asunder, lives that have been poi- 
soned, and young corpses that ha\ 2 been carried to the tomb by 
their having become masters. That man should be subject to the 
same discipline and held to the same standard of virtue as woman 
is the doctrine of the new ethic of the sexes, and the day has evi- 
dently dawned in which public sentiment will rigorously enforce 
the doctrine. For good men have begun to realise with Goethe : 
"That the unit that makes a self-sacrifice only injures himself, 
unless all endeavor the whole to accomplish." 


The battle flags of Germany, draped with funeral colors, 
mourn for the great Field Marshal who carried them triumphantly 
to Paris, and saw them wave above the Pont d'Jena, and by the 
Arc de Triomphe in the Champs Elysee. Although a soldier all 
his life, it may be justly said that Von Moltke's victories have 
done much to abolish war. Unlike all other conquerers there was 
nothing spectacular or theatiical about him. We never see him 
pictured on a fiery steed, prancing about in the midst of his 



legions, frantically waving his hat, and charging upon clouds of 
smoke. He was the genius of military mathematics, and he won 
battles by calculation as Paul Morphy won in chess. France de- 
clared war against Prussia on the 15th of July, 1870, and by the 
ist of August the Emperor Napoleon had played the opening 
moves of his game ; these Moltke answered by counter moves 
which placed the German army on the French frontier, and there 
is no doubt that had he met the Emperor at any time after the ist 
of August, he could have warned him of the inevitable by an- 
nouncing "Checkmate in five moves." It is often said that a lib- 
eral discount must be allowed on his victories, and credited to the 
blunders of his enemy ; but this abatement will not apply to 
Moltke because whether his enemy would do the right thing or 
the wrong thing, was thought out, and allowed for in his calcula- 
tions. He was the martial spirit of his country in its intellectual 
activity, he was Germany's "battle thinker" and by the very logic 
of his combinations he forced the moves of his adversary, and 
made the strategy not only for his own army but for that of his 
enemy also. 

"Learn to condense, " is a bit of commonplace advice often 
given to students of literary composition, but the lesson of the 
great Field Marshal's life shows the value of the admonition in 
every form of work, from the management of an army to the 
writing of a letter. There was no waste in Moltke, not even a 
waste of words; and men said of him that he could be silent in 
many languages. The reason was that he had learned to combine 
his faculties and direct them all in harmony to the purpose of the 
hour. He needed all his energies for action, and because even 
talk must draw for sustenance upon the nervous forces, he said 
little. He had brought his own faculties under drill and disci- 
pline, and in like manner he could condense the energies of a 
kingdom into a cannon ball, compact and irresistible. He drew 
eight corps of the Prussian army from divergent points and con- 
verged them upon Sadowa in the critical moment of battle, as a 
lens concentrates the sunbeams. The centre of the Austrian 
army melted under the heat, and when the sun went down upon 
the field, Austria had no longer either voice or vote in the politics 
of Germany. By his infallible mathematics he worked out the 
doom of the French empire long before the challenge of Napoleon 
came, so that when the proclamation of war was made, he had 
nothing to do but touch the little button that set in motion all the 
complex machinery of the German army, and move it like the 
sweep of a sword across France to the field of destiny by the ram- 
parts of Sedan. 

Every great man's life is an example from which instruction 
may be drawn ; and that of Moltke shows the value of temperance 
and exercise ; not the exercise of pleasure, but the exercise of 
work. He started in life with ninety years capital in the bank, 
and his account was never overdrawn. His allowance for a day 
sufficed him for a day, he did not by over-indulgence and excess 
consume his capital, and so he lived his ninety years, a healthy, 
vigorous man. He worked hard but he slept easy ; and the reason 
why he did not die at three score years and ten, or even at four 
score years, was because he had something to do, a potent element 
of long life. When a man at sixty-five, or seventy, says that his 
work in this world is done, it is a charity for nature to take him 
at his word, and give him his eternal rest. Many men, perhaps 
most men, start in life with ninety years capital in the bank, but 
they overdraw, and find themselves vitally bankrupt at sixty, or 
sixty-five. Few of them reach an end so happy and desirable as 
Moltke's last day. Work in the line of public duty in the morn- 
ing, dinner at home in the evening, a quiet game of whist, and 
then, "a stoppage of the heart"; no days of pain and fever, no 

vigils of the night ; only a stoppage of the heart ; and in the morn- 
ing Berlin wakes up to learn that Father Moltke is dead : 

" For in the night, unseen, a single 1 
In sombre harness mailed, 
Dreaded of man, and surnamed the Destroyer, 
The rampart wall had scaled." 

Moltke was old enough to remember how the French tore Ger- 
many to pieces after the battle of Jena, as the lion tears his prey. 
He lived to see Germany united, and through his own industry 
and genius, the greatest military power in the world. 

I have often wondered why it is that wholesale state socialism 
is nauseous and disagreeable to so many people who have a greedy 
appetite for it when they can get it in retail quantities. There is 
a practice in England, and a very good practice too of " heckling" 
a candidate for Parliament, by which is meant, not assault and 
battery, or any other form of bodily torture, but a searching of the 
inner soul of him by questions concerning definite measures of 
public policy. It is not enough in that country for a candidate to 
proclaim in clarion tones that he is devoted to " the time-honored 
principles of the party," but he must declare whether or not he 
will vote for this, that, or the other specific thing. At the recent 
election for Hartlepool, the opposing candidates were Sir W. Gray, 
Unionist, and Mr. C. Furness, Liberal, both excellent and very 
popular men. One of the " hecklers " put eighteen straightforward 
questions to each candidate, and amongst them this, ' ' Are you in 
favor of free education, and the supply of a free dinner to scholars 
who would otherwise be compelled to remain in school all day 
without any food ? " Now, here was state socialism of high qual- 
ity, but in retail quantity, and Mr. Furness promptly answered, 
"Yes"; but Sir W. Gray could not swallow it without a little 
Worcestershire sauce, and so he flavored it thus : "I would favor- 
ably consider such a proposal, but I think the free dinner would 
require great care to prevent imposition." This answer was not 
satisfactory, as it left the electors in doubt whether Sir W. Gray 
meant great care in the cooking of the dinner, or in the giving of 
it, and Mr. Furness was elected. 

A great deal of sarcastic humor has been showered upon the 
various incongruities which have grown out of the Pension impos- 
ture ; as for instance, the ridicule cast upon the old patriot who 
applied for a pension because he broke his leg in "jumping the 
bounty," and upon the other, who did not go to war himself, but 
caught the rheumatism owing to " the overstrain of mental an- 
guish " which he suffered on account of those who did. All that 
kind of amusing banter is laughed at as the rollicking mockery of 
the journalistic funny man, who enliveneth the dull corners of the 
newspapers ; but here is an actual case which will make the pro- 
fessional jester serious. In ihe Review of Rcviezus for February 
appears a letter from Walt Whitman, dated January 6, 1891, in 
which he says: "lam totally paralysed from the old secession 
war time overstrain." This was not written in irony, but in sober 
earnest, and it will probably silence the critics who sneer at Walt 
Whitman's pension. At the time he received his injury, the poet 
was about forty years old, and although he did not overstrain him- 
self enough to go to the war, he did not escape its calamities, for 
now at the age of seventy he finds himself paralysed by "the old 
secession war time overstrain." It is not necessary to pretend like 
that for sympathy, because all men will sorrow for a poet in dis- 
tress ; and if his poems entitle him to a pension, let him have it, 
for poetry, and not for a "war time overstrain." 

M. M. Trumbull. 





To the Editor of The Open Court: 

Possessed of rather more than ordinary interest in the sex 
question, and agreeing with Professor Cope that any proposition 
for the amelioration of the condition of women should be discussed 
and decided by women, I am moved to certain remarks suggested 
by his article on "The Material Relations of Sex" in the first 
number of The Moiiist. 

All through its perusal I was impressed by his unconscious 
recognition of an underlying question, which, apart from woman's 
inferiority, determines the relations of the sexes. This is plainly 
apparent in the paragraph alluding to the communistic system of 
wealth production and distribution, in which he admits the possi- 
bility of promiscuous sex-relations. While I agree with Professor 
Cope that to institute communism would be a decided blow at 
progress, since progress consists in a constant widening of individ- 
ual liberty while communism invokes authoritarian direction, 
nevertheless, I hold that in acknowledging the possibility of variety 
in sex relations under the communistic regime, he has admitted 
that the present social arrangement of sex is the necessary out- 
growth of our economic conditions. 

Postulating the fact of woman's mental and physical inferior- 
ity, our writer sees no possible ultimatum for her but the service 
of maternity and child-bearing in return for " protection and sup- 
port" from some man, or set of men called a "state." This brings 
us at once to two vital questions ; 

Is woman's inferiority the cause, or the effect, of her economic 
subjection ? 

Is economic independence for woman a possible ideal ? 

I think it can be clearly proven that the mental constitution 
of woman, like that of man, has never failed to rise where restric- 
tions upon equal freedom have been torn down. Whenever woman 
has had the same opportunity as man, results have proven that 
her capacities for development are as unlimited as his. It may be 
objected that I am instancing exceptional cases instead of dealing 
with types. My reply is that only in exceptional cases have women 
enjoyed the same opportunities as men. Yet these cases are suffi- 
ciently numerous to warrant the conclusion that nature affords no 
insuperable obstacle to sex-equality in brain ; and that inferiority 
in the typical woman must be regarded as the result of her de- 
pendent economic condition, created by the artificial restrictions 
of man. * 

Concerning the physical disability of the sex, it is more diffi- 
cult to show the beneficent results of liberty, since even the most 
advanced of women are so hampered by body-dwarfing, dress, and 
custom that we have scarcely sufficient data for opinion concerning 
her posibilities of physical development. Such as we have would 
indicate that much of her present incompetence during periods of 
gestation and nursing, is incidental to the present defective social 
arrangement which condemns woman to the wasteful drudgery of 
individual housekeeping, and all the slavish work of the much 
lauded family-life. 

However, even physical inferiority need not prove the eternal 
barrier to economic independence which Professor Cope would 
make of it. To-day industrial progress demands not so much 
physical strength as skill. Undoubtedly the elephant has physical 
strength superior to man, yet that he is no competitor against man 
I need waste no space to prove. Likewise the Hercules of ages 
past would have no place in competitive industry to-day simply 
because he would not be adapted to his environment. Granting 
the present physical disability of woman, it by no means follows 
that, with equal opportunity, she would be unable to compete with 
man in the fields of productive industry. Indeed one general com- 

plaint of the workingmen is that they are competing, and, by the 
law of the survival of the fittest, have already driven men out of 
several branches of employment, such as textile fabrics, shoe- 
making, etc. No great amount of strength is required, but skill 
and patience ; and it is the universal testimony of the overseers 
that women are equally skilful and more reliable. 

There is a class of economic reformers called anarchists, who 
contend that with opportunity to exploit nature thrown free to the 
human race, the hours of labor would be so reduced as to enable 
one to produce sufficient to satisfy all his needs by three hours 
work per day. This with our present machinery, the possibilities 
of further reduction being left to further developments. They also 
contend that such freedom must necessarily result in constant la- 
bor-demand, thus securing the laborer against the present night- 
mare of involuntary idleness. Under such conditions, bearing in 
mind that the ever increasing displacement of physical strength 
by machinery, keeps reducing the physical burden of productive 
labor, woman's economic independence becomes a realisable ideal, 
and the whole matter of sex association changes. When woman 
comprehends her independence, marriage will no longer be a mat- 
ter of " protection and support," which Professor Cope declares 
is the basis of monogamic wifehood. It will become a matter of 
mutual co-operation, based, let us hope on something higher than 
the sale of the powers of motherhood, and demanding the same 
standard for man as for woman. 

Whether monogamy or variety will then obtain depends on 
which of these systems produces the higher type of humanity. At 
present it is impossible to decide, since without the independence 
of woman there can be no equality, and without equality no true 
adjustment of sex relations. Voltairine de Cleyre. 

To the Editor of The Open Court: — 

As THE preceding notice of my article by Miss de Cleyre re- 
peats the usual formula of a class of social reformers, I must 
again emphasise the foundation facts of the situation, as they ap- 
pear from a physiological standpoint. These are somewhat op- 
posed to our ideals, I freely admit ; but it is the history of every 
human mind that is not incurably imaginative rather than exact, 
to learn the lesson which a bondage to material conditions im- 
poses on us all alike. 

Miss de Cleyre asks, "Is woman's inferiority the cause or 
the effect of her economic subjection ?" She then expresses the 
opinion that it is the effect and not the cause of such subjection, 
as well as of " body dwarfing dress and custom." This is the fun- 
damental error of a large class of women doctrinaires, and it needs 
but a superficial knowledge of Natural History to comprehend it. 
The inferior physical strength of the female sex is general (though 
not entirely universal) in the animal kingdom ; and as mentality is 
one of the functions of human mechanism, it extends to the mental 
organism in man as well. It is a simple corollary of the law of 
the conservation of energy that where a large amount of energy is 
devoted to one function, less remains for expenditure in performing 
another. The large part of the female organism devoted to the 
functions of gestation, lactation, and maternal care of children, 
simply puts her out of the race as a competitor with man, on any- 
thing like equal terms. Even if those functions are not active, 
the machiuery for the performance of other functions is not 
thereby in-reased in quantity or improved in quality, except in 
such small degree as one woman may accomplish in a life-time. 
And this small accomplishment she does not transmit, since the 
unmarried woman has no children. I call attention to the fact 
that although woman has had the advantage of the inheritance of 
male accomplishments and capacities since the origin of the 
species, the relation between her and man still remains about as it 
ever has remained. The one sex progresses about as rapidly as 
the other, and they maintain about the same relative position. 



This fact is so fundamental that it is unreasonable to expect any 
change in the future. What can be done is to improve both sexes 
as much as possible in all their powers, and to acquaint each with 
their limitations. In this way the greatest amount of happiness 
may be attained with a minimum of conflict and waste. 

It is evident that marriage is the destiny of both sexes, and 
the question which I have considered in the article in The Monist 
is the nature of its conditions. 

In the first place monogamic marriage is no more a slavery 
to women than the support of a family is to a man. Man is, to 
use this common, but inexact expression, in a state of "slavery" 
to the conditions of his environment, and no socialistic scheme 
can relieve him of the difficulty, though some mitigations can be 
doubtless introduced. Man is an essential part of this environ- 
ment, and contributes to the "slavery" to which he is subject. 
Woman's environment differs from that of man, in the difference 
in the relation in which she stands to man, as compared with that 
which subsists between man and man. That she should escape 
the consequences of this environment is no more to be anticipated 
than is the case with man himself. She has the advantage of 
man however in having for her ' ' master " a being who is naturally 
inclined to admire, aid, and support her ; while, to man the en- 
vironment is mostly controlled by grim necessity imposed by un- 
feeling forces. When man rebels against this environment, and 
makes reprisals on society by appropriating the property of 
others, he makes a serious mistake, and he finds it out, generally 
soon. So some women, discontented with their relations to a hus- 
band, are dishonest to him. They also have trouble. Community 
of wives is as impossible as community of property, unless wives 
surrender all claims to more than temporary consideration. There 
are both men and women who think this the better system, and 
who act on it. But the men generally abandon it ultimately and 
marry. It would be interesting to know what becomes of the 
women. More information is needed, but the general impression 
is that such women have not chosen wisely. 

It is true that woman like " any animal" can bear children ; 
but it is also true that man like " any animal " must make a liv- 
ing. The two occupations are on a par. But neither should neg- 
lect to develop their "self-hood" in such leisure time as they can 
command from these necessary occupations. Every girl should 
have a good education, especially in biology and housekeeping, 
and the more she knows of the science of life, the better will she 
be prepared to know and to fulfil her part in human society. 

Another aspect of the question of woman's entrance into the 
industrial field as a competitor to man, requires more space than I 
can give to it here. It is the fac*, that woman, ' >t beir j respon- 
sible for the support of her hu land and family, can afford to 
work at some occupations for much lower wages than man can 
accept. This is one of the reasons for the lower rate of women's 
wages ; and it is not due, as many thoughtless agitators assume, 
to the parsimony of severe task-masters. The advent of this cheap 
labor into some fields has driven men out of them, and if the 
range of such work is to be much extended, a larger number of 
men will be thrown out of employment. This state of affairs is 
said to exist in some departments of iron manufactures in Pitts- 
burg, and in some other industry in Scotland. Under such cir- 
cumstances men must emigrate, or cease to marry, since they 
can support themselves alone on their reduced wages. Any thought- 
ful person may follow this state of affairs to its logical conse- 
quences One of these would be the diminution in the number of 
marriages and the substitution therefor of a system in which 
women would be the chief sufferers. So that their success in 
some of the lighter fields of industry does not redound to the 
benefit of women at large. 

I do not wish to be understood however to deny in tolo the 
advantage of more or less industrial occupation for women. For 

temporary purposes and under peculiar conditions, it is often not 
only desirable but necessary that women should have remunera- 
tive occupation. But I merely wish to point out that this state of 
affairs does not represent the fundamental organisation of society, 
and cannot alter it in the least. It is only necessary where there 
is a surplus of female population. 

It has occurred to me that, in order to escape further discus- 
sion on my part, it would be well to reinforce the fundamental 
fact on which my position rests, viz. the disadvantageous relation 
to man occupied by woman in an unprotected and unaided "strug- 
gle for existence." Some women do not appear to realise this fact, 
and some men support them in this mistaken opinion. Neverthe- 
less the real state of the case is known to, or suspected by, the 
majority of mankind. To such as do not perceive it, it may be a 
help to refer to the fact that every pursuit apart from those con- 
nected with maternity, and the teaching of children, may be as 
well done by men as by women, and a majority of the pursuits of 
men cannot be followed by women at all. The fact that a num- 
ber of women succeed for a time in occupations usually filled by 
men, does not alter the general principle. Indeed it is often en- 
tirely proper and necessary that they should do so, provided that 
they understand the general law of social equlibrium and act ac- 
cordingly when occasion arises. But of this law they sometimes 
do not hear, but are taught by alleged reformers in the press and 
on the lecture platform, doctrines that falsely assert that in the 
nature of things the world is as open for an independent career to 
a young woman as to a young man. If I shall have prevented a 
single young woman from spending the best years of her life in 
learning the truth in this matter, my purpose will have been 
served. E. D. Cope. 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All commuTiications should be addressed to 

the: O^EiT COXJX^T, 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 


THE KREUTZER SONATA. P. K. Rosegger 2795 

THE KREUTZER SONATA. Charles K. Whipple... 2796 
THE NEW ETHIC OF THE SEXES. Susan Channing. 2798 
CURRENT TOPICS. Field Marsha! Moltke. Free Schools 

and Free Dinners. Gen. M. M. Trumbull 2799 


The Economic Relations of Sex. Voltairine De Cleyre 
and Prof. E. D. Cope 2801 

The Open Court 


Devoted to the ^A^ork of Conciliating Religion -with Science. 

No. 194. (Vol. v.- 12 ) 

CHICAGO, MAY 14, 1891. 



If a philosopher of ancient Rome should be per- 
mitted to re-visit the glimpses of the upper world, the 
discovery of the Lost Atlantis would probably surprise 
him much less than the development of a superior 
civilisation in climes which for ages had been inhabited 
only by unprogressive barbarians. 

The stars of empire, in science, art, and industry, 
had, indeed, long proved a tendency to move with the 
shifting centres of political power, but from the earli- 
est dawn of historical traditions to the close of the 
Middle Ages that movement had progressed in an al- 
most due-westerly direction : From the highland homes 
of our Aryan ancestors to Persia, Asia Minor, Greece, 
Italy, and finally to Spain — for there is no doubt that 
the Spanish Moriscos were the chief heirs of Roman 
culture. The expulsion of the Moors seemed to have 
deprived Europe of that heritage, but about the middle 
of the sixteenth century the seed that had been extir- 
pated from the soil of Andalusia began to germinate 
in Holland, in northern France, in Germany, Poland 
and Great Britain, the sea-port towns of the Mediter- 
ranean became marts for the products of northern in- 
dustry, and before long the paeons of northern in- 
ventors drowned the echo of the classic Eureka ; the 
Muses and Graces began to ramble in fur-coats; in- 
spired poets brandished bottles of usquebaugh. 

Had the overpopulation of the summerland-regions 
obliged the children of progress to colonise the higher 
latitudes ? As if in special refutation of that con- 
jecture Columbus had shortly before opened the gates 
of a new western world. Besides, large tracts of pro- 
ductive lands in southern Europe and northern Africa 
were hardly more than half- settled. Hundreds of 
square miles in the valley of the Guadalquivir remained 
tenantless, while emigrants from Lombardy sought 
new homes on the banks of the Thames and the Elbe. 
Still more suggestive is the northwest ward advance 
of the centres of enterprise on our own side of the At- 
lantic. A considerable percentage of the Mayflower 
pilgrims were at first inclined to regret the adverse 
gale which forced them to land six hundred miles 
north of their original goal, but the free choice of sub- 
sequent home-seekers made the path of that storm the 
chief highway of exodus. The frozen swamps of north- 

ern New England were certainly not colonised for 
lack of room in the sunny terrace-lands of North 

It would be equally erroneous to suppose that the 
pioneers of progress were driven further and further 
north for lack of encouragement in the old southern 
homes of civilisation. Mohammed the Second was 
not the only southern ruler who tried in vain to foster 
the arts of peace, and the industries of northern 
Europe may be said to have born their first fruits in 
spite of manifold discouragements. The fervid en- 
thusiasm of southern saints, too, is apt to get chilled 
north of the Alps, and the seed of Temperance has 
found a far more congenial home in Yemen than in 

But if frost cannot be said to strengthen the mo- 
tives of our virtues, it certainly tends to mitigate the 
penalty of our vices. Sir Emerson Tennent inclines 
to the opinion that the Hindoo dread of fleshfood is 
something more than a prejudice, since his Cingalese 
servant, a fellow entirely unincumbered with religious 
scruples, was taken deadly sick after eating a lunch 
of boar- steaks on a warm morning. Eighteen ounces 
of solid food per meal for a man, and twelve ounces 
for a child, is considered a fair ration in many Bengal 
villages of the more prosperous sort, and an idler who 
should increase that average to forty ounces would 
be warned by his sanitary advisers. The experience 
of the traveler Chamisso, on the other hand, makes it 
probable that a native of Kamtschatka can devour six- 
teen pounds or 256 ounces, of fat meat, with perfect 
impunity, and Guinnard once saw a Patagonian chief 
finish eight installments of a stew that was handed 
him in brimful pots, holding at least a quart and a 
half a-piece. The test-cases of numerous Arctic voy- 
agers have exploded the notion that a low temperature 
begets an instinctive craving for alcohol, but it is no 
use denying the fact that it mitigates the after effects 
of alcoholic intoxication. In other words, a northern 
toper cannot justify his foible on the ground of greater 
temptation, but only on the unholy plea of greater 
impunity. Alcohol cannot increase our vital vigor, 
but it will decrease it less in Scotland than in Spain — 
less even in a Spanish winter than in a Spanish summer : 

" Junio, Julio of Agosto, dieta de olillas 
Y tres nodios en bragillas," 


— says a Castilian proverb. "During the dogdays 
take a pledge of abstinence and continence." 

But such pledges are apt to get broken. The 
Spanish sinner who has been starved in Lent is not 
likely to become a saint in midsummer, though the 
effect of his excesses enforces the old proverb by re- 
morseless arguments, and the many million-fold repe- 
titions of that experience has gradually deflected the 
westward currents of emigration in a northerly direc- 
tion. < 

In short, frost is an antidote. It moderates the in- 
tensity of blue to the victim of blue devils; it makes 
pork-fritters digestible and mince-pies less imme- 
diately fatal, and it has at least indirectly modified 
the earth-blighting effect of pessimistic doctrines. The 
gospel of anti-physical dogmas was never able to get 
a proper foothold in latitudes where a man's daily 
food generally depends on his daily toil. Honey and 
wild locusts do not abound in the snow-drifts of North 
Dakota ; in Norway there is no denying the fact that 
bodily exercise may profit a good deal if applied to a 
stack of cordwood. A stylite mounting a pillar in 
the Kansas prairies would be unhorsed by the first 
blizzard. On a hillside, fourteen miles east of Irkutsk, 
Professor Atkinson once saw a gang of convict-miners 
dig through thirty-eight feet of frozen soil, before they 
could reach a stratum of loose gravel. In a climate 
of that sort it must be decidedly difficult to persuade 
a native that mountains can be removed by faith ; and 
the warning not to take thought of the morrow is 
naturally apt to be neglected where the morrow is so 
unaccustomed to take care of itself. 

Hence the latent Protestantism of the North Euro- 
pean nations, even at a time when Denmark was as 
full of convents as Italy. The precept of absolute 
obedience was always rather hard to enforce in those 
northern monasteries, and the divine right of kings is 
liable to be challenged by men who had learned self- 
reliance in their struggles with snow- tornadoes and 
famished wolves. "How is it, your slow-going coun- 
trymen were so fast in renouncing their allegiance to 
the church of their fathers ? " Erasmus was once asked 
by an Italian prelate. "There was no time to lose — 
the costume of the Flagellants is too unhealthy in a 
climate like ours," said the facetious Hollander, and 
Henri Rochefort is probably right that the Czars will 
never succeed in freezing out the virility of their sub- 
jects, and ought to transfer their rebels to a sweat cure 
establishment, a la Cayenne. In the meantime, it is 
a suggestive fact that the northern vassals of paternal 
monarchs enjoy the prerogative of being handled with 
comparative soft gloves. The proverbial supercilious- 
ness of Prussian bureaucrats is said to have been toned 
down remarkably in the province of Sleswick-Holstein. 
Even in Russia the north provinces assert the prestige 

of Government pets, and the attempt to curtail their 
priveleges (as in the case of Finland) is defied in a 
manner which further south would be resented by 
wholesale edicts of banishment. 

With that comparative freedom from the worst 
evils of tyranny, of fanaticism, alcoholic enervation 
and dyspepsia, the immunities of the North rather 
outweigh its climatic sorrows and might seem to jus- 
tify the prediction that the hegemony of Caucasian cul- 
ture, will ultimately erect its standard on the borders 
of the Arctic circle. The attempt to verify that pre- 
diction would, however, be wrecked on the obstacle 
of two physiological facts : Social culture is insepar- 
able from the culture of certain plants which no arts 
of tillage will ever enable to flourish in the climate of 
Labrador, and the energy-stimulating influence of a 
low temperature reaches its maximum near the line 
where the sixty-fifth parallel crosses the fir-woods of 
northern Europe and at least ten degrees further south 
in our own hemisphere. 

Our boasted latterday civilisation is, in fact, a hot- 
house product, and even hothouses cannot wholly dis- 
pense with the aid of sunlight. We cannot hope to 
feed the colonists of an Arctic Utopia on a harvest of 
pot-plants, and after deducting the manufacturing ex- 
penses of our artificial luxuries the net surplus of hap- 
piness would be too small to discount the gratuitous 
blessings of the South. Even in northern Lapland 
permanent settlers become stunted, both in their phys- 
ical and mental development ; there are still a few 
fairly comfortable villages in the valley of the Tornea 
River and on the shores of Lake Paitas ; but further 
north the antidote of frost is administered in clearly 
indigestible quantities. The Laplanders are kinsmen 
of the northern Tartars, while their tall Swedish neigh- 
bors are descendants of the Caucasian Race; but about 
the end of the ninth century a specially enterprising 
tribe of that race, a horde of adventurous Northmen, 
settled the west coast of Iceland, with results summed 
up in the present condition of the frost-tortured 
islanders. The nine hundred winters of their national 
existence have shortened their average stature by nine 
inches and their average longevity by fifteen years. 
Their hereditary pluck has saved them from utter de- 
feat in the struggle for survival, but their victories, 
like those of King Pyrrhus, have been purchased at a 
price that will prove ruinous in the course of a few 

While the belief in the value of life and earthly 
happiness remained an unquestioned tenet, the natives 
of the Mediterranean god-gardens were hardly tempted 
to colonise the frozen steppes of Sarmatia, and the 
revival of Nature worship may yet people Mexico with 
refugees from the rigor of Canadian blizzards and blue 
laws ; but by that time the Spanish-American Repub- 



lies might be "industrially organised," in the Bel- 
lamite sense of the word, and the day, perhaps, is near 
when the overpopulation of the sunny latitudes will 
reduce the lovers of independence to the choice be- 
tween the Boss-ship of a national workhouse and the 
solitude of a snowbound Arcadia. 

The manliest males of our species will probably 
prefer the latter alternative, and the last habitable 
borders of the Far North will remain the chosen home 
of the Free. 



It is an old hyperbolical figure much in favor with 
popular orators to talk of "the eyes of England," the 
"eyes of Europe," etc.; but it is no exaggeration to 
say that a year ago " the eyes " of Europe, of Australia, 
and the United States were turned toward the East 
End of London. The dockers in their great Strike 
had the sympathetic good wishes of their fellow work- 
ers in every land where Labor and Capital stand in 
the like relation to each other that they do in Great 
Britain. Nor was that sympathy restricted to the 
working classes. 

I have seen, with regret and pain, in certain "La- 
bor organs " contumely and derision poured upon sym- 
pathisers and conciliators occupying some other social 
plane than that of the artisan and the laborer; being 
held up as enemies in disguise rather than as friends 
inspired by the best feelings of humanity. What do 
such champions of Labor mean? — what do they want? 
The so-called upper classes — I use this well-under- 
stood term for convenience, not that I believe in up- 
per and lower, or classes and masses — are reproached, 
and have for ages laid themseves open to the reproach 
of active oppression, or heartless indifference to the 
sufferings of the many. Very well. But when from 
these classes step forth men to denounce the wrongs, 
aid and advocate the rights of the millions — why 
should they be repulsed or meet with scorn and hatred ? 
One man 7iiay have in view the exaltation of his church ; 
another, the preservation or the obtaining of a seat in 
Parliament; while another, believing in the coming 
peril of the higher classes may think that peril is to be 
averted by timely concessions, in the substitution of 
something like justice for wrong. But, excepting in 
any case where such designs are palpable and un- 
questionable, it is forbidden by every sentiment of 
honor to question the motives of those who set them- 
selves the holy task of assuaging sorrow and raising 
up the fallen. 

Looking back to a year ago, the events of that time 
present an aspect much to be admired. The stead- 
fastness and pacific conduct of the dockers, the en- 

* From The Ne-wcastU Chronicle (1890). 

ergy and the moderation of their leaders, and the 
earnest sympathy of friends and volunteers, untiring 
in their efforts to help the strikers to secure a substan- 
tial victory; these facts, together with the "crowning 
mercy" of the docks directors, combined to render 
the dockers' strike of 1889 one of the most memorable, 
perhaps the most glorious of struggles in the history 
of labor. 

The dockers obtained their demand, the sixpence 
an hour, with special payment for overtime, and other 
valuable concessions. Their success had a widespread 
influence, and was the indirect, if not the direct, cause 
of an advance of wages and other advantages in many 
other callings, in, and far beyond the metropolis. 

So far so good. I remember the time when the 
class of laborers employed in the loading and unload- 
ing shipping were paid but 3d. per hour. That was 
the payment, I happen to know, on Fresh Wharf, 
Lower Thames Street ; and I believe it was the same 
at the London and St. Catherine's docks, fifty — sixty 
years ago. I doubt if in some skilled trades the work- 
ers receive as good wages as now the dockers receive 
at the rate of their sixpence an hour. 

I wish that the history of labor struggles since Oc- 
tober, 1889, could be regarded with as unalloyed sat- 
isfaction as the incidents and immediate result of the 
Dockers' Strike. 

It was, I believe, one of the accepted conditions 
of the termination of the great strike that unionists 
and non-unionists were to work side by side, at least 
without the one being molested by the other. In the 
course of a few months the non-unionists have disap- 
peared. If this elimination of the non-unionist ele- 
ment has been brought about by moral suasion, by 
fair and just means, there can be no cause for aught 
but approval and commendation. But if otherwise, 
then the voice of approval must be mute, even if the 
voice of condemnation is not heard. 

I suppose there can be no doubt about the matter, 
as one sample, a sample only, attests. Some two or 
three weeks ago it was reported in the newspapers 
that six hundred dockers in Tilbury Docks had gone 
on strike to oust three non-unionists. Of course they 
succeeded. I wonder what has become of the luckless 
three ! 

But the refusal to work with non-unionists, the re- 
fusal to allow non-unionists to work, is not all, nor the 
worst. Having attained to a certain strength, which 
seems to give them absolute mastery, the dockers 
close their books and will not permit any further ex- 
tension of membership. Nor is this all. Not only are 
those who have hesitated or neglected to become 
unionists to be henceforth excluded, but also weakly 
men, men who, from whatever cause, cannot prove 
themselves up to a certain standard of bodily strength 

2 8o6 


— though what that standard is does not appear — are 
also to be excluded. These exclusions seem to me 
cruel and monstrous. 

Formerly, and but a few years ago, Trades Un- 
ionists fought against the tyranny of "the Document," 
and the attempts of millowners and other capitalists to 
compel them to renounce their unions as the condition 
of employment. The workers were justified in their 
resistance, and all men worthy of the name rejoiced 
in the defeat of the capitalists. But now the case is 
reversed. It is the men who dictate the terms of em- 
ployment. Not content with their own perfect free- 
dom to unite and combine, they refuse to all not in 
their unions the common right to labor. "In the 
sweat of thy brow thou_ shaft eat bread," ran the pri- 
meval curse. But the new version is: — "Though 
willing to sweat, you shall not earn bread, unless we of 
the Union grant you leave, and admit you to share in 
our monopoly !" 

With all his imaginative powers, Robert Burns 
could never have imagined such a state of things. 

" See yonder poor, o'erlabored wight, 

So abject, mean, and vile. 
Who begs a brother of the earth 

To give him leave to toil ; 
And see his lordly fellow-worm 

The poor petition spurn. 
Unmindful, tho' a weeping wife. 

And helpless offspring mourn." 

The "lordly fellow-worm" indicated by the poet 
was the landlord, the capitalist, the rich man, the em- 
ployer. To him it would have been inconceivable 
that the docker, or other Trades Unionist, should play 
the part of the "lordly fellow- worm." 

I pass by with the merest mention the scenes of 
violence at Leeds, Southampton, and elsewhere. 
Mark : violence not directly against "the classes," but 
against those who belong to "the masses, " and against 
third parties having no connection whatever with the 
question at issue between the dockers and directors. 
At Southampton, why should travellers to, or from, 
any part of the world, have been hindered in their 
outgoing, or their incoming because of some question 
at issue between the strikers and those they strike 
against? The world was not made for Caesar ! Granted. 
Was the world made for Trades Unionists alone? 
There are other people in the world who require more 
than standing room ; who, as well as Csesar and the 
docker, have certain "unalienable rights" to "life, 
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." 

The "blackleg" is the /'cic noir of the unionist. 
What is a "blackleg"? If I understand, the oppro- 
brious term is applied to the unemployed who are 
willing to take work voluntarily relinquished by men 
on strike. The strikers have the right to declare they 
will work only on certain conditions. But have they 
the right to prevent other men working? It is said 

the "blacklegs" are idlers, loafers, "scalawags," in 
short, a disreputable class. It is assumed such per- 
sons abhor work. Surely if they seek work, that is 
the first sign of their reformation. 

The "blackleg " is an evil, no doubt. But how is 
he to be eliminated ? Strikes that are disastrous help 
to make "blacklegs," and unions that refuse admis- 
sion to workers must add to the number of the unem- 
ployed, from whom the "blacklegs" come. What are 
the men to do excluded from the books of the Dockers' 
Union ? Are they to starve ? Or must we go back to 
the evil times following the spoliation of the Church 
when wholesale hangings took the place of relief and 
aid at the doors of monasteries — when death was the 
penalty of pauperism — and hangmen eliminated some 
seventy thousand of "sturdy beggars," for whom, as 
for the "blacklegs" now, there was "no place at Na- 
ture's board " ? 

In the old time insolent calumniators of the labor- 
ing classes were profuse in flinging about such choice 
epithets as "mob," "the rabble," " the unwashed," 
etc. Mild terms compared with those applied to the 
outcast " blacklegs." "Reptile" is about the mildest 
term ! What a blaze of natural and justifiable indig- 
nation there would be if any member of " the classes " 
applied to "the masses" the language applied by some 
of "the people" to others of "the people"! Con- 
strued literally, it might be regarded as incitements 
to the maiming and murdering of "blacklegs." I pro- 
test against these methods of dealing with an acknowl- 
edged evil. Boycotting and savagery of word and 
deed may be condoned by trafficking politicians, but 
should be sternly discountenanced in our social troubles 
— difficult enough to dispose of without the addition 
of incitements to the brutalities of internecine con- 

It had been hoped that the Trades Congress con- 
vened to meet in Liverpool would at least have tried 
to so regulate the labor movement as to correct the 
fast-growing evils glanced at — merely glanced at — in 
these remarks. That hope has been disappointed. 

The first great fault of the Congress was in its con- 
stitution. The delegates appear to have numbered 
from four hundred and fifty to four hundred and sixty. 
Assuming the whole number, or nearly the whole pres- 
ent, it would be next to impossible for four hundred 
and fifty delegates to act as a deliberative assembly. 
The House of Commons is a mob, and often a disor- 
derly mob, of nearly seven hundred, sitting in a room 
ridiculously, because purposely, constructed to hold 
not more than half that number comfortably ! I sup- 
pose the Trades Congress suffered in like manner from 
inadequate accomodation. The People's Charter pro- 
posed to reduce the number of M. P. 's to three hun- 
dred, and that would, at least, have mitigated the evil 



of the present constitution of the Lower House. Had 
the Trades Congress been limited to one hundred and 
fifty, or even one hundred members, it would have 
been much more likely to have exhibited the attributes 
of a deliberative assembly. According to some of the 
papers, the dockers had fifty delegates ; they might 
with as much reason have sent five hundred. They 
could as well, or even better, have been represented 
by one-fifth of the fifty. Fulness of representation 
does not depend upon number, but upon proportion. 

Another mistake was the crowding of what in mod- 
ern parlance is termed "the agenda " with resolutions, 
for the discussion of which three weeks would hardly 
have been sufficient, into the debates of one week. 
Debates, properly speaking, there were none. The 
greater portion of time occupied by leading speakers 
was with personal explanations. The most important, 
far-reaching questions were disposed of after ten, five, 
and even three minutes' speeches ! Considering the 
number of debaters who could be permitted to speak 
at all, the Congress might well have been reduced to 
fifty members, and the cost in time and money of four 
hundred been saved. 

Could anything be more absurd than the treatment 
by the Congress of the co-operative deputation ? The 
CO operators have been reproached that, intent only 
on the making of big dividends, they have ignored, or 
continually deferred, putting co-operation to the test 
in relation to production. I suppose it was on this 
most important subject that the deputation attended 
to express the views of the leading and most advanced 
co-operators. On the question whether to grant the 
deputation a hearing, the Congress (strange to say) 
was equally divided. The president got over the diffi- 
culty in a way worthy of the wisdom of King Solomon. 
He decided to halve the deputation and allow one of 
the two to speak five minutes. Five minutes ! The 
most thoroughly informed, the most explicit of speak- 
ers, restricted to five minutes, would naturally fail to 
give any adequate idea of the potency of co-operation 
applied to production. The pretence of hearing the 
deputation at all was a farce. 

Valuable and praiseworthy resolutions were adopted. 
As to others less commendable, criticism would be use- 
less. A word or two must, however, be said in refer- 
ence to the contest over the Eight Hours Question. 

It seems to me much less remarkable that the 
" Legal Eight Hours Day" was adopted by a majority, 
than that the hostile minority was so large — the more 
remarkable as the minority was headed by delegates 
from Manchester, which led the way in the earlier 
struggles for the reduction of the hours of labor ; and, 
more, Manchester was the first place where journalis- 
tic and organised efforts were made in favor of eight 
hours, nearly sixty years ago. 

My sympathies are with the eight hours advocates ; 
but every thinking man must admit that the grave 
doubts and objections, not of capitalists, but of the 
workers represented by the minority in the Congress, 
are not to be set aside by the vote of a triumphant 
majority, the waving of hats, and loud hurrahs. 
Speech-making as at present abused is the curse of 
the land. But it does not follow that so important a 
question as that of eight hours should be decided upon 
after some half-dozen speeches of ten or five minutes 
each. Not the most able and terse of speakers could 
do justice to such a theme in any such time. Con- 
sidering the far-reaching consequences — whether for 
good (as I believe) or for evil (as many fear) — of the 
adoption of the eight hours system, a week's discus- 
sion, calm and deliberate, would not have been an 
hour's waste of time before the president rose from 
his seat to put the question to the vote. 

Last week I asked : Does the "People's Parlia- 
ment," the Trades Congress, the direct representative 
of labor, present a more hopeful aspect than is pre- 
sented by the House of Commons ? I am sorry I can- 
not answer in the affirmative. But there will yet be 
time and abundant opportunity to guard against a 
repetition of the mistakes of the Liverpool Congress. 
If the trades desire a representative body which shall 
impress society at large and receive the country's en- 
dorsement, the delegates must be reduced to a num- 
ber fitted to constitute a deliberative assembly ; and 
the time for deliberation must not be restricted to the 
Procrustean limits of a week's discussion. So, haply, 
may be avoided the regrettable excitement, scenes of 
disorder, and most of the unsatisfactory procedure of 
the recent Congress. 

The late Prince Consort, on a memorable occasion, 
observed that Parliamentary institutions were on their 
trial. Democracy — political and social — is now on its 
trial. Let not misgiving stifle hope. Let us rather 
cling to the belief that — despite regrettable incidents 
of the passing moment — the time will come — 

When the despot and the 
And morn shall break, an 

h alike shall pass away : 
I awake in the light of a ; 

: day. 



The United States of North America is a nation 
without a name. Poets hail our country Columbia, 
and Europeans call us simply Americans. Yet these 
appellations are not, properly speaking, names. At- 
tempts have been made to provide the nation with a 
name, yet so far all the attempts have proved failures. 

We need not care about a name. When we need a 
name, it will be given us. Much more difficult would 

* Reprinted from America. 


it be to give ideals to a nation ; yet luckily, although 
we are a nation without a name, we are not a nation 
without ideals. 

We have high and great ideals, although they are 
neglected and forgotten by many ; and some of our 
most influential politicians treacherously trample them 
under foot. We can say without boasting that our 
ideals are the noblest, the broadest, the loftiest of 
any in the world. 

Our ideals are sublime because they are human- 
itarian, and thus this great republic of the West has 
become a bulwark against the evil powers of inherited 
errors and false conservatism. So long as it shall re- 
main faithful to the principles upon which its consti- 
tution is founded, this republic will be a promise and 
a hope for the progress of mankind. 

There is a prejudice in Europe against the ideals 
of America. It is fashionable in the old countries to 
represent Europe as the continent of ideal aspirations 
while America is described as the land where the 
dollar is almighty. Germans most of all are apt to 
praise the fatherland as the home of the ideal while 
the new world is supposed to be the seat of realistic 
avarice and egotism. 

This is neither fair no true, for there are as many 
and as great sacrifices made for pure ideal ends on 
this side of the Atlantic as on the other side. We 
maintain that Europe is less ideal than America. If 
impartial statistics could be compiled of all the gifts 
and legacies made for the public benefit, for artistic, 
scientific, and religious purposes, the American figures 
would by far exceed those of all Europe. In Germany 
the government has to do everything. It has to build 
the churches, to endow the universities, to create in- 
dustrial and art institutions. If the government would 
not do it, all ideal work would be neglected, science 
would have to go begging, and the church would 
either pass out of existence or remain for a long time 
in a most wretched and undignified position. This 
state of affairs is not at all due to a lack of idealism 
among the people of the old world, but is a consequence 
of the paternal care of the government. The govern- 
ment provides for the ideal wants of its subjects ; so 
they get accustomed to being taken care of. There 
is scarcely anybody who considers it his duty to work 
for progress, except where he cannot help it, in his 
private business, in industrial and commercial lines. 
Scarcely anybody thinks of making a sacrifice for art, 
science, or the general welfare, and science and gen- 
eral welfare are looked upon as the business of kings 
and magistrates. 

We live in a republic and the ideals of republican 
institutions are a sacred inheritance from the founders 
of this nation. We are no subjects of a czar or em- 
peror, for in a republic every citizen is a king; and 

the government is the employ^ of the citizens. The 
highest officer of our government, the president of the 
United States is proud, when leaving the White House, 
of having tried to be a faithful public servant promot- 
ing the general welfare according to his best ability. 

It is true that we are far — very far, from having 
realised our ideals. Our politics are full of unworthy 
actions, and many things happen of which we are or 
should be ashamed that they are possible at all in the 
home of the brave and the free. It is true also that 
many of our laws, far from expressing a spirit of justice 
and goodwill towards all mankind, are dictated by 
greed and egotism ; further it is true that national 
chauvinism and national vanity go so far as to make 
any, even the sincerest, criticism of our national faults 
odious. Nevertheless we have our ideals and our 
ideals may be characterised in the one word humani- 

How many there are who believe in the beneficial 
influence of petty advantages, unfairly gained by giv- 
ing up the higher standard of justice and right ! How 
many there are who suppress the cosmopolitan spirit 
of our ideals and foster a narrow exclusiveness which 
they are pleased to call patriotism. Their sort of pa- 
triotism will never benefit our country but will work 
it serious injury. 

Our fourth of July orators pronounce too many and 
too brazen flatteries upon our accomplishments, and 
speak too little about our duties, when they represent 
us as that nation upon the development of which the 
future fate of humanity depends. There is too much 
talk about our freedom, as if no liberty had existed be- 
fore the declaration of independence. What a degrada- 
tion of the characters of our ancestry ! Was it not love 
of liberty that set the sails of the Mayflower, was it not 
love of liberty that drove so many exiles over the At- 
lantic. Did the love of liberty not pulsate in the hearts 
of all the nationalities that make up our nation ? Were 
not the Saxons, the Teutons, the sons of Erin, the Swiss, 
the French, the Italians, jealous of their liberties? 
does not their history prove the pride they took in 
preserving their rights and securing the dignity of 
their manhood ? Love of liberty fought the battle of 
the Teutoburg forest even before the Saxon sepa- 
rated from his German brothers to found the English 
nation. Love of liberty was described by Tacitus as 
the national trait of the barbarians of the North whose 
institutions and customs and language have with cer- 
tain modifications devolved upon the present genera- 
tion now living in America. 

Let us not undervalue our forefathers for the sake of 
a local patriotism ; let us fully recognise the truth that 
we have inherited the most valuable treasures of our 
national ideals from former ages. In thus understand- 
ing how our civic life is rooted in the farthest past, we 


shall at the same time look with confidence into the 
darkness of future eras. Our present state is but a 
stepping stone to the realisation of higher ideals, for 
the possible progress of mankind is infinite and our 
very shortcomings remind us of the work that is still 
to be done. 

Let us cherish that kind of patriotism which takes 
pride in the humanitarian ideals of our nation. 

With our humanitarian ideals we shall stand, and 
without them we shall fall. So long as our shores re- 
main the place of refuge for the persecuted, so long 
as our banner appears as the star of hope to the op- 
pressed, and so long as our politics, our customs, our 
principles rouse the sympathy of liberty-loving men, 
our nation will grow and prosper ; the spirit of progress 
will find here its home and the human race will reach 
a higher stage of development than was ever attained 
upon earth. 

This great aim, however, can be attained only by 
a strong faith in the rightfulness and final triumph of 
the ideal, by perseverance and earnest struggle, by a 
holy zeal for justice in small as well as in great things, 
by intrepid maintenance of personal independence and 
freedom for every loyal citizen, and by the rigid ob- 
servance of all duties political and otherwise so that 
the electors cast their votes in honesty and the elected 
fill their offices with integrity. 

Historical investigations proved that the golden 
age must not be sought in the past. May we not 
hope that it lies before us in the future? Without be- 
lieving in a millennium upon earth, in a state of ideal 
perfection, or in a heaven of unmixed happiness, we 
yet confidently trust that we can successfully work for 
the realisation of the golden age in our beloved home 
on the western continent — where the conditions are 
such as to leave no choice for two alternatives : either 
the uneducated classes (among whom we have to count 
some of our richest citizens) will with their ballots and 
their influence in politics ruin the countr)', or they 
will, perhaps after many dearly bought experiences, 
be educated up to a higher moral plane. 

Let us work for the American Ideal and let us hope 
for the future. 


Among the most interesting traits of a free people is the free- 
dom to give pet names to public men, especially to prominent 
politicians, or candidates for office. It is a pleasant thing to live 
in a land of liberty where we have the privilege of scolding in 
poetical figures of speech the persons who differ from us in opinion, 
and those whom we envy or bate. We ought to prize most highly 
the privilege of making faces at a man who was once President of 
the United States, and we should appreciate the precious right to 
call him "the stuffed prophet," a playful nickname given bim by 
his enemies. Let us never surrender our sovereign prerogative of 
marking the Secretary of the Treasury by the descriptive title 
" Calico Charley," even though we know not why we call him so. 

The ingenuity and taste we display in christening our statesmen 
e.xcite the wonder of the world, and finely illustrate that comical 
exuberance which we call American humor. I once knew a Senator 
of the United States, from one of the big states too, who probably 
at some time or other had a Christian name, but in the shuffles of 
a political career it was lost, and he was familiarly known as 
"Coffee Pot"; and another, who was named by his parents John 
James, is called by an opposition paper "Jumping Jack," for no 
reason in the world that I can see, except that the initials of the 
real name and the nickname are the same. There is, it must be ad- 
mitted, some coarseness in the titles we give to prominent men ; 
but then, look at our freedom, and the stretch of our eagle's 
wings. As Elijah Program remarked of the estimable ChoUop, 
" Rough he may be. So air our Bears. Wild he may be. So air 
our Buffaloes. But he is a child of Natur', and a child of Free- 
dom, and his bright home is in the Settin' Sun." Sometimes, how- 
ever, the nickname is expressive and refined, as for instance, that 
given by Miss Anna Dickinson, the other day, to the Postmaster 
General, "Merciful Heavens" Wanamaker. This is a specimen 
of our more aesthetic style ; and yet they say that Miss Dickinson 
is insane. I cannot believe it ; and if the Charge is true, then " Pity 
'tis, 'tis true." 

There is very often great profit in a nickname. In fact it 
sometimes forms the capital stock of an aspiring politician ; and 
when he happens to be a candidate, it is worth a hatful of votes 
at the polls. It is most effective when it brings its lucky owner 
down to a picturesque level with the common people and identifies 
him with their manners, their hardships, and their trials. In such 
a case it is more impressive and captivating than the patrician 
designations "Baron," "Earl," or "Duke." The descriptive 
nickname "Railsplitter," was a prouder title — for election pur- 
poses — than any to be found in courts of chivalry. An old 
rail, was a more illustrious coat of arras — for a candidate— than 
any picture in the books of Heraldry. We do not accuse a man 
of statesmanship when we call him "Old Tippecanoe, " and yet 
the musical jingle of that nickname was a potent influence in the 
election of two Presidents of the United States. No doubt when 
General Cass "run for President" in 1848, he could show a states- 
man's record forty years long, but what availed it when the friends 
of the rival "nominee" lifted the whole contest out of politics by 
calling their candidate "Old Rough and Ready"? By this de- 
vice they took the popular imagination captive, and elected their 
man. Sense yields to sentiment because reality is dull to those 
who dig, and weave, and spin. 

* * 

The comedy of the "Two Governors," now being played in 
the state of Nebraska, seems to be an infringement of the copy- 
right of Pinafore. There is much pathos in that memorable scene 
where the gold-laced captain changes places with the common sai- 
lor on being informed by Little Buttercup that she had mixed 
them up when babies in such a careless way that the wrong baby 
got into the right place, and the right baby into the wrong place. 
Some people have doubted the probability of the incident illus- 
trated in that scene, but a very close imitation of it was presented 
the other day in the State of Nebraska, when Governor Boyd sur- 
rendered his office and glided into private life, as soon as he found 
out that through some careless mixing up, he was not Governor of 
Nebraska, and that another man was. With every disposition to 
treat such a serious matter with due solemnity, I half suspect that 
the whole performance is another bit of American humor, and 
that I am the victim of a practical joke. So like broad comedy is 
it, that I should not be at all surprised if both Governors were to 
step on to the portico of the capital, and sing a comic duet, 
with the usual accompaniment of a double shuffle dance. It is a 
delightful piece of Harlequinade. Here is a man, elected Gov- 



ernor by the people, sworn into office, and governing in style, 
when, Presto, he vanishes, through the window, and another 
man begins governing who was not elected at all. The reason 
given is worthy of the pantomine ; it appears that the duly elected 
Governor was not eligible to the office because his father was 
only half a citizen ; that is, he had been only half naturalised. 
He had taken out his first papers but not the second. A good deal 
of sympathy is felt for Governor Thayer, who has been so ma- 
gically made governor. It is so uncomfortable to sit in another 
man's Chair of State, and to wear another man's clothes. He will 
probably abdicate. 

* * * 

In the fight at Tom Taggart's, down there in Southern Illinoy', 
a truthful account of which may be found in the poetry of John 
Hay, we are informed that Col. Blood fired at Jedge Flinn, and 
missed him, the bullet striking an innocent bystander, one of the 
admiring spectators of the fight. In the language of the historian, 
" it took Seth Bludsoe atwixt the eyes, and caused him great sur- 
prise." The surprise of Mr. Bludsoe was trifling when compared 
with that of Mr. Henry W. Blair, late Senator from New 
Hampshire, and Ambassador designate to China, when informed 
that the Chinese government would not receive him, because 
to the Chinese people he was persona non grata. This deci- 
sion took Mr. Blair "atwixt the eyes," and caused great surprise, 
not only to him, but also to the President, who had commissioned 
him to represent the United States at the Court of China. The 
surprise came from the discovery that the " Heathen Chinee " had 
the same feelings as other people, and that the Chinese govern- 
ment had a sensitive National spirit. Mr. Blair, when in the Senate, 
had been conspicuous for his intolerance towards the Chinese. He 
had spoken of them always with scorn and bitterness, he had legis- 
lated harshly against them, and had inflamed the Anti-Chinese 
prejudices of his own countrymen. With an egotism dull as leather 
he affects to be astonishtd when the Chinese government with 
dignified self-respect refuses to receive him. Another surprise is 
this, that Mr. Blair himself did not have spirit enough to decline 
the mission, knowing how unwelcome he would be to the Chinese, 
and that he could not expect any courtesies in China except those 
official civilities due to him as Minister from the United States. 

M. M. Trumbull. 



" If I lay waste and wither up with doubt 

The blessed fields of heaven where once my faith 

Possessed itself serenely safe from death ; 

If I deny the things past finding out ; 

Or if I orphan my own soul of One 

That seemed a Father, and make void the place 

Within me where He dwelt in power and grace. 

What do I gain, that am myself undone?" 

(Reprinted from Har/ier's Magazine.) 



"What do I gain ?" Must you be paid a price ? 

When did Truth barter for a man's belief ? 

Come she with joy we hail her, bring she grief 
We hail her still ; her name is our device. 

She needs no cabbage-garden paradise 

To feed a faith whose lingering days grow brief : 
Above all saviours she shall reign the chief 

Though some may sell and some deny her thrice. 

"What do I gain ?" O Finder of the way, 

Whose white feet passing crush the seeds of doubt. 
Immortal Truth, we know wherewith you pay : — 

Faith in the fellowship of worlds about 
This flower of thought that lives in human clay, 
One with the soul of things past finding out. 


We regret to learn that Mr. George Julian Harney of Rich- 
mond, England, is just now disabled by a severe attack of rheu- 
matism. Mr. Harney is one of the most eminent of the working- 
men statesmen of Great Britain, almost the last survivor of the 
Chartist leaders who agitated England fifty years ago, the political 
teachers of the Russells, and the Gladstones who have reaped 
where they have not sown, the harvests planted by the Chartists 
in toil, and sorrow, and persecution. For a long time Mr. Harney 
has been a contributor to the Newcastle Chronicle, and his articles 
in that paper on the labor question and the social problems are 
among the best in tone, temper, and instruction that we have ever 
read. They are, of course, not so tempestuous as the speeches he 
used to make in his " hot youth," but they abound in practical 
good sense, and they are illustrated by incidents and apt quota- 
tions drawn from a remarkable memory. His articles on "The 
Two Parliaments," the House of Commons, and the Labor Con- 
gress at Liverpool, are good specimens of his peculiar style. We 
print one of them in this issue of The Open Court. It would appear 
from this that the Labor Parliament was not much wiser or better 
than the other, and equally imbued with the spirit of class legis- 




$a.oo PER YEAR. $i.oo FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All commuoications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 17s La Salle Street,) 


FROST AND FREEDOM. Felix L. Oswald, M. D 2803 

THE LABOR PARLIAMENT. Geo. Julian Harney.. 2805 

THE AMERICAN IDEAL Dr. Paul Carus 2807 

CURRENT TOPICS. Nicknames in Politics. The Comedy 

of the Two Governors. The Ministry to China. Gen. 

M. M. Trumbull 2809 


What Shall it Profit ? W. D. Howells 2810 

Answer. Louis Belrose, Jr 2810 

NOTES 2810 

The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion ^vith Science. 

No. 195. (Vol. v.— 13.) 

CHICAGO, MAY 21, 1891. 

( Two Dollars per Year. 
( Single Copies, 5 Cts. 


The Norwegian poet Henrik Ibsen has written a 
most awe-inspiring drama under the m}'sterious title 
"Ghosts." Does this most modern author believe in 
spirits? Does he take us into a haunted house? 
Are not ghosts and haunted houses left as a survival 
only ? O no ! The ghosts of which Henrik Ibsen 
speaks are everywhere ; they are not exceptional cases ; 
for we ourselves are visited by the spirits of former 
ages ; our brain is haunted by ghosts. It is full of the 
proclivities, the dispositions, the ideas, and the sins of 
our ancestors. 

Mrs. Alving, the widow of a dissolute husband, 
and mother of a son whose life has been poisoned by 
his father's sin, witnesses her son's behavior in the 
adjoining room. It is the e.xact repetition of a scene 
in which her husband had played her son's role some 
twenty years ago. There is his ghost reappearing. In 
considering the weighty seriousness of the truth, that 
we inherit, not only the character of our ancestors, 
but also the curses of their sins ; that all our institu- 
tions and habits are full of ideas inherited from a dead 
past, she says : " I am afraid of myself, because there 
is in me something of a ghost-like inherited tendency 

of which I can never free myself I almost think 

we are all of us ghosts. It is not only what we have 
inherited from father and mother that reappears in us, 
it is all kinds of dead old beliefs and things of that 
sort. These ghosts are not the living substance of our 
brain, but they are there. nevertheless and we cannot 
get rid of them. When I take up a newspaper to 
read, it is as though I saw ghosts speaking in between 
the lines. There must be ghosts all over the country. 
They must be as thick as the sands of the sea." 

It is perfectly and literally true that our soul is 
haunted by ghosts ; nay, our entire soul consists of 
ghosts. Our brain is the trysting place where they 
meet and live ; where they grow and combine, and in 
their combinations they propagate, they create new 
thoughts which according to their nature will be be- 
neficent or baneful. 

What are these ghosts ? They are our experiences, 
the impressions of our surroundings upon the sentient 
living substance of our existence. They are the reac- 
tions that take place upon the impressions of our sur- 
roundings ; they are our yearnings and cravings; they 

are our thoughts and imaginations. They are. our 
errors and vices, our hopes and our ideals. 

Henrik Ibsen shows that the ghosts which are the 
inherited sins of our fathers lead unto death. What 
an overwhelming and horrific scene is the end of the 
drama, where the son asks his mother to hand him 
the poison in case the awful disease will pass upon 
him which will soften his brain and spread the eternal 
night of imbecility over his soul. ' The mother in her 
anxiety to calm her son's wild fancies, promises to do 
so: "Here is my hand upon it," she says, with a 
trembling voice: "I will — if it becomes necessary. 
But it will not become necessary. No, no ! It will 
never become a possibility." 

There is a law of the conservation of matter and 
energy ; but there is also a law of the conservation of 
the stuff that ghosts are made of. The law holds good 
not only in the material world, but in the spiritual 
world also. Every vice transmits its curse ; and the 
moment comes when the unfortunate mother has to 
face the fatal attack of the terrible disease. 

The heroine of the drama, the innocent and 
wretched mother had sought help of the clergyman — 
the man whom she had loved. When her husband 
had betrayed her, had poisoned her in her youth, she 
fled to him in wild excitement and cried : " Here I 
am, take me ! " But the clergyman's stern virtue had 
turned her away from his door, and he prevailed upon 
her to remain a dutiful wife to her vicious husband. 
She had tried to find comfort in the religious injunc- 
tions which he preached to her. She lived a life in 
obedience to what he represented as her duty. But 
now she says to him : "I began to examine your teach- 
ing in the seams. I only wished to undo a single 
stitch, but when I had got that undone, the whole 
thing came to pieces, and then I found that it was all 
chain-stitch sewing-machine work." 

The distressed woman feels only the curse of law 
and order which have been invented for the salvation 
of mankind. Her experience leads her to trust rather 
in anarchy than in the threadbare superstition which 
our generation has in favor of the letter of the law. 
The sternness of virtue cannot save us, nor our blind 
obedience to sanctified traditions. She exclaims : 
"What nonsense all that is about law and order. I 
often think it is that which exactly causes all the mis- 



eries there are in the world. I can no longer endure 
these bonds ; I cannot ! I must work my way out to 
freedom ! " 

Here lies the cure of the disease. We must work 
our way out to freedom. The simple method of shak- 
ing off law and order will only increase our troubles. 
We must learn to understand the nature of ourselves. 
By patient work alone can we exorcise the evil spirits 
that haunt our souls ; and we can nourish and foster 
those other spirits which shower blessings upon our 
lives and the lives of our children. We cannot escape 
the natural law which, inviolate, regulates the growth 
of our souls ; but we can accommodate ourselves to 
the law and the same law, that works disaster and 
death, will produce happiness and life. 

Superabundance of hfe gives a power that might 
produce great and noble results. But when the life is 
stagnant as was that of Mrs. Alving's husband, a vigo- 
rous youth exuberant in strength and health, an un- 
satisfiable craving for pleasure takes the place of a 
want of activity ; and instead of useful work, vicious 
habits are produced. The germ of many diseases is 
a morbid pursuit of enjoyment. Pleasure is made the 
aim of life, leading astray step by step into the abyss 
of misery and death. Not that happiness and pleasures 
were wrong ! But it is wrong to make of them the 
purpose of life. Let happiness be the accompani- 
ment of the performance of duty and happiness will 
follow as the shadow follows the body. If we pursue 
happiness, we turn our back upon the sun of life and 
we shall never find either satisfaction or happiness. 

* ■' * 

The law of the conservation of soul-life with its 
blessings and its curses has not only a gloomy side, it 
has also a bright side, and it behooves us when con- 
sidering our heir-loom of curses, to remember that 
they are small in comparison to the grand inheritance 
of blessings which have come to us from thousands of 
generations. What is all our activity, our doing, and 
achieving, our dearest ideals — what are they but the 
torch of life handed down from our ancestors ? Gustav 
Freytag, the German novelist, might also have called 
almost all his novels "Ghosts." Especially the "Lost 
Manuscript" and the series of novels called "The An- 
cestors" are studies illustrative of the same truth. Yet 
while Ibsen paints the dark side only of the law of the 
conservation of ideas, Gustav Freytag paints the dark 
and Ihe bright sides.- Gustav Freytag says : 

" It is well that from us men usually remains concealed, what 
is inheritance from the remote past, and what the independent 
acquisition of our own existence ; since our life would become full 
of anxiety and misery, if we, as continuations of the people of the 
past, had perpetually to reckon with the blessings and curses which 
former times leave hanging over the problems of our own existence. 
But it is indeed a joyous labor, at times, by a retrospective glance 
into the past, to bring into fullest consciousness the fact that 

many of our successes and achievements have only been made pos- 
sible through the possessions that have come to us from the lives 
of our parents, and through that also which the previous ancestral 
life of our family has accomplished and produced for us." 

We have to bear the evil consequences of the 
vices of our ancestors, but these evils can be overcome; 
and when they cannot be overcome, they will after all 
find a termination, for death is the wages of sin. 

The nature of sin is its contrariness to life ; its 
main feature is the impossibility of a continued exist- 
ence. Extinction being the natural consequence of 
viciousness, the wages of sin are at the same time the 
saviour, the redeemer from the evils of sin. 

If all the parents in the whole world were like 
Chamberlain Alving, the ruthless father of Oswald 
Alving, and like Mrs. Engstrand, the frivolous mother 
of the coquettish girl Regina, humanity would soon 
come to an end. It may be that none of us is entirely 
free from these traits ; but some of us are so more or 
less. In some of us these traits are mixed with enno- 
bling features, and we are striving to overcome that 
which we have recognised as bad. However, nature 
is constantly at work to prune the growing genera- 
tions. Death is the wages of sin, and the bright side 
of this awful truth is the constant amelioration of the 



Morris, the poet, gives us in "News from No- 
where," a delightful picture of the golden future when 
poverty, vice, marriage, and all the other evils imposed 
upon man by society are to be abolished so completely, 
that everybody will be healthy, handsome, and fond of 
work. This is substantially the plan on which Brook 
Farm and nearly forty other communities started in 
this country, between 1840 and 1845, with the sup- 
port of Emerson, Parker, Alcott, Hawthorne, William 
H. Channing, George Ripley, Margaret Fuller, Eliz- 
abeth P. Peabody, James Freeman Clarke, Hedge, 
Higginson, Curtis, Greeley, Dwight, James, Story, 
Cranch, Whittier, and Lowell. Even Thoreau took 
a friendly interest in socialism, and there was nothing 
else about which these Transcendentalists agreed so 
generally. The system then in vogue had been an- 
nounced, as a deduction from Nature's own theory, 
by Fourier, whose fundamental principle was inscribed 
upon his tomb-stone in these words: "Instincts cor- 
respond to destiny and produce harmony." No won- 
der that a theory thus originated had "so much truth" 
in the opinion of Emerson and other Transcenden- 
talists, who knew that communities had been founded 
by Pythagoras, and projected by Plato and Coleridge. 
Marx and Lassalle have since reached similar results 
by a priori reasoning ; and such conclusions- proceed 
most legitimately from unscientific methods of thought. 



The popularity of socialistic and also anarchistic 
writers is largely due to the boldness with which they 
set aside the teachings of experience and deny the 
value of existing institutions. What could have been 
more in harmony with a philosophy which placed in- 
tuition high above experience, and thought institutions 
much less sacred than impulses? 

How speedily experience avenged herself for this 
neglect was shown by the failure of more than half of 
the Fourierite associations before they had been in 
operation for two years. Brook Farm lasted longer, 
but ended in leaving the laborers and investors un- 
paid ; and this was the case wherever the principles 
of Morris and Fourier were followed out. The mem- 
bers were allowed to work as they chose ; and they 
did not often choose to work hard at what needed 
most to be done. This was notoriously the case at 
Brook Farm, where the real workers, as Emerson 
says, were very few ; and they found themselves so 
much in demand, that one of them has told how it 
was "'Burton' here and 'Burton' there," as long as 
he stayed. Most of the managers had no authority 
and showed little ability, except in cases where they 
enriched themselves at the community's expense. Life 
proved less pleasant in many of the phalansteries than 
in the old-fashioned family; but the main trouble was 
the difKculty of making both ends meet. 

Whatever success has been achieved by socialistic 
communities is due to their having conformed so far 
to teachings of experience as to keep up discipline 
enough to compel the members to work as the rulers 
direct. These rulers usually serve for life, fill all va- 
cancies among themselves and appoint subordinate 
officials without consulting the rest of the community, 
and do not even tell how much money has been earned 
or spent. This is substantially the plan which has 
been followed for nearly a hundred years by the Shak- 
ers, and also that of the Amana community which was 
started the same year as Brook Farm, 1842, and is, I 
think, still prosperous. One of the Amana overseers 
admitted to Mr. Nordhoff, author of "The Communis- 
tic Societies of the United States," that three hired 
men would do as much work as five or six of the 
brethren ; and a similar confession was made to him 
in a Shaker village. This deficiency is, however, made 
up partly by making all purchases with great care at 
wholesale prices, and partly by enforcing rigid econ- 
omy and abstinence from luxuries. The practice of 
the necessary economy, diligence, and obedience has 
been greatly facilitated by religious zeal ; and there 
has been at least one case in which lack of this bond 
made it impossible to tolerate the severity of manage- 
ment under which the community was actually grow- 
ing rich. (See the chapter on the Wisconsin Phalanx 
in Noyes's "History of American Socialisms.") 

It has of course been much easier for a village to 
keep up the strict discipline necessary for success in 
socialism than it would be for a great nation. Any 
form of communism, which might be imposed upon 
our people by a revolutionary minority, or even by a 
majority vote, would encounter millions of opponents, 
who would soon be joined by men who had been so- 
cialists on account of a restlessness which would make 
the new restraint insupportable. Still other millions 
of people would keep on trying, as they do now, to 
get a living with as little labor as possible. The disci- 
pline, necessary to mkke this mass of sluggishness and 
hostility sufficiently productive, would have to be 
cruelly severe. The lash would be as busy in the in- 
dustrial army as it ever was on a Southern plantation; 
and it must be remembered that all the horrors of 
slavery could not make negro labor as efficient as it is 
now under freedom of competition. A still greater 
obstacle to the success of an industrial army of sixty 
million soldiers would be the difficulty of finding com- 
petent commanders. When we think how hard this 
was thirty years ago, we cannot suppose that it would 
be easy now. Our system of electing rulers and ap- 
pointing officials has not proved such a brilliant suc- 
cess, that we could rely upon it for placing all our 
farms, factories, stores, railroads, and other industries 
under such able managers as not to run serious risk 
of national bankruptcy. The more these industries 
are concentrated, the greater will be the difficulty of 
successful management. At present, competition in- 
creases or diminishes the power of each employer of 
labor, according as he succeeds or fails in employing 
it efficiently. The man who knows best how to run a 
small factory makes it a great one ; and thus the place 
is filled much more suitably than could be done by a 
popular election or a government appointment. Thus 
competition is the test of competency ; and no other 
test has been found equal to the needs of large busi- 
ness interests. The nationalists have not persuaded 
our people that our railroads can be made less danger- 
ous by letting the superintendents be appointed with 
no particular reference to qualifications, and dismissed 
every four years. Scientific methods of thought are 
now so much in honor, that socialism is not likely to 
regain the popularity which it enjoyed before the 
Fourierite bubble burst. Glorious results will be 
achieved by reformers who work patiently by the light 
of experience ; but no hasty theorist is going to turn 
the world upside down. 



It is generally acknowledged that Professor Russel 
Wallace discovered simultaneously with Charles Dar- 
win the theory of evolution. In the preface of a popu- 
lar book recently put forth by his publishers he mod- 



estly terms his researches "Darwinism," thus yielding 
to the great naturahst the honor which ought equally 
to attach itself to his name. As a scientific work it is 
thorough-going and conclusive. His knowledge is im- 
mense, his style simple, his logic irresistible. As a 
text-book of the doctrine which it seeks not only to 
further popularise but to substantiate by the latest 
scientific discoveries, it is a brilliant compendium of 
Charles Darwin's two great books — "The Origin of 
Species" and "The Descent of Man." It is more 
than this. It boldly and intelligently enters a field 
which other celebrated naturalists refused even to 
touch and draws conclusions as to the ethical aspect, 
or fatality of the doctrine as applied to man. In fact 
it is a forcible accessory to the doctrine of optimism 
which for generations asserted itself in Christian po- 
lemics and, in a vague but certain manner, dominated 
Greek and Oriental philosophy. Professor Wallace 
admits that he has differences, that his differences in 
many respects clash with the minor assertions of his 
beloved co-worker, Charles Darwin ; but he announces 
that his entire work tends forcibly to illustrate the 
overwhelming importance of natural selection over all 
other agencies ill the production of new species. It 
has been urged as a palpable objection to Darwin's 
work, that he founded his theory on the evidence of 
variation in domesticated animals and cultivated 
plants ; and from this field of inference built up the 
generalisation which made the doctrine of evolution a 
method of the universe. Professor Wallace, primarily, 
seeks to prove the theory by a direct reference to the 
variations of organisms in a state of nature and hence 
his labors are the more interesting and valuable be- 
cause of the objections raised against Darwin's alterna- 
tive. Hence, whatever defects exhibited themselves 
in the modus operandi of Charles Darwin are in this 
book noticeably absent and the way is paved for con- 
tinued triumphs which "Darwinism" as a doctrine 
has already achieved. 

Two suggestions which Professor Wallace makes 
are particularly worthy of notice, altogether because 
they are facts which underlie the present social order 
and which are inexcusably forgotten in much of the 
current discussion of social and religious questions. 
In fact they are — the one an objection to the Malthus- 
ian doctrine of population which Darwin seemed to 
hint at, that population tends to increase faster than 
subsistence ; and the other, the necessary development 
or contingency of that part of Darwin's work, which 
he seemed timid of asserting, or disqualified by his 
own testimony in his "Autobiography" to argue — the 
optimism which groups and centres the phenomena of 
nature about the benevolence of God or what most of 
us mean when we say God. It is needless to say that 
these facts are interdependent and would associate 

themselves in any thoughtful mind. It is also need- 
less to remark that they circumscribe the problem of 
evil (which has always puzzled humanity) and the 
problem of eschatology about which sectarian Chris- 
tianity has had so much wrangling. It would not be 
irrelevant to the general discussion to observe that I 
take for granted the doctrine of evolution, reaffirming 
Professor Wallace's revolutionarj' postulates. 

Malthus found no greater advertiser of his cruel 
doctrine than Charles Darwin who, in the third chap- 
ter of his "Origin of Species" maintains that the 
struggle for existence is "the doctrine of Malthus ap- 
plied with manifold force to the whole animal and 
vegetable kingdoms." Hence our own Agassiz, for 
he was Americanised enough to be called our own, 
bitterly opposed "Darwinism " chiefly if not altogether 
because it conflicted with his notion of a benevolent 
supreme being and seemed to be, to use his own lan- 
guage, "Malthus all over. " To Malthus we are in- 
debted for one of those high sounding formulas — the 
geometrical and arithmetical ratios — by which the 
misery of the many seem to be naturally justified, and 
which among a vast number of people, as J. S. Mill 
declares, carries far more weight than the clearest 
reasoning. It is to quote Mr. Mill again "an unlucky 
attempt to give precision to things which do not admit 
of it, which every person capable of reasoning must 
see is wholly superfluous to the argument." And yet 
Mr. Mill accepted the theory that population tends to 
increase beyond the means of subsistence. Now Pro- 
fessor Wallace vigorously opposes this view of the 
universe. He indirectly touches upon the subject in 
what may yet prove to be an axiom, that the tendency 
everywhere in nature is to give to animals "the maxi- 
mum of life and the enjoyment of life with the mini- 
mum of suffering and pain." This conclusion in itself 
carries great weight in as much that, as an indirect 
argument, it can be employed very effectively against 
the Malthusian doctrine. For if the reverse were 
true, if the tendency of nature to furnish animals with 
the minimum of life and the enjoyment of life or the 
maximum of suffering and pain, a doctrine which 
hinting at the method of the universe, Malthus seemed 
to think was the fatality of all animal creation, then 
Professor Wallace's work is in vain. Then is God not 
benevolent but omnipotent and his caprice our inex- 
plicable damnation. The fact is as Professor Wal- 
lace has shown that there are innumerable barriers 
erected by nature herself among her own offspring for 
the possession of the very thing Malthus and Darwin 
mournfully despair of, and that ever3'where in the sud- 
den catastrophies which befall and accompany animals 
in their growth and history,catastrophies in which whole 
species of animals are annihilated, the tendency if 
not the actual law of the universe is, to ameliorate 



the suffering and destroy the pain of the unfortunate. 
What has usually been supposed to be horrible and 
af;onising pain among the lower animals chiefly, is, in 
reality, nothing of the kind but is the picturesque 
fancies of our own pathetic nature — a fact which many 
of us can testify in our own experience. And along 
this line Professor Wallace proves conclusively that it 
is the fear of death as a dreaded crisis among men and 
a partial cause of much needless and anticipated pain 
which, horrifying the human mind, makes many im- 
agine must be the actual condition among the animal 
families in the war for the survival of the fittest. And 
he states that as the death of animals is generally un- 
anticipatory and in nearly all cases immediate and not 
lingering, the fact of their terrible pain is at once 
preposterous conjecture if not an impossibility. Why 
some animals should die that others might live is a 
question which no one has been able to explain yet 
because it is so is no reason for affirming that the 
method is derogatory to any animal's happiness or 
pleasure. It is a presumption which has no founda- 
tion in reason — is built upon sophistry and is a part 
of that pseudo science which has found apologists in 
every age and among every civilised people on the 
globe. The fact is aa Professor Wallace admits that 
this daily and hourly struggle, this incessant warfare, 
is nevertheless the very means by which much of the 
beauty and harmony and enjoyment in nature is pro- 
duced, and also affords one of the most important ele- 
ments in bringing about the origin of species. He 
adds weight to what some might call his speculative 
moralising by asserting in contradistinction to Mal- 
thus and Darwin that "while the offspring always ex- 
ceed the parents in number, generally to an enor- 
mous extent, yet the total number of living organisms 
in t/ie itwrld docs not, and cannot, increase year by year." 
"Consequently," he continues, "every year, on the 
average, as many die as are born, plants as well as 
animals; and the majority die premature deaths." Of 
course this fact does not disprove at a single stroke 
what Winwood Reade writes in his "Martyrdom of 
Man,"* nor does it furnish any adequate explanation 
of this very condition he bewails but it disproves the 
theory of Malthus and hence destroys the lofty super- 
structure of sophistry which was built upon the asser- 
tion that as population tends to increase, the power of 
subsistence tends to decrease or to be inadequate. 
Hence the claim made by a rising political economist 
that poverty as the failure of nature to meet the re- 
quirements of an ever increasing population, is a gross 

*"Pain, grief, disease and death, are these the inventions of a loving 
God ? That no animal shall rise to excellence except by being fatal to the 
life of others, is this the law of a kind Creator ? It is useless to say that pain 
has its benevolence, that massacre has its mercy. Why is it so ordained that 
bad should be the raw material of good ? Pain is not the less pain because it 
is conducive to development. Here is blood upon the hand still and all the 
perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten it." 

misrepresentation of nature, a caricature of the crea- 
tor's beneficence, the very opposite of which being 
really the case, that there is plenty of provision for 
all the natural wants of animal creation. 

When we ascend from such considerations up into 
the greater thought of an optimism which such facts 
employ, an interpretation of the universe from the 
standpoint of benevolence will not seem impertinent. 
The great conflict in which nations of men and species 
of animals were actors, has been the means of devel- 
oping a higher plane and multiplying opportunities 
for life's enjoyment. The truth is very much as Profes- 
sor Wallace has stated, that all the slow growths of our 
race struggling toward a higher life, all the agony of 
martyrs, all the groans of victims, all the evil and 
misery and undeserved suffering of the ages, all the 
struggles for freedom, all the efforts toward justice, all 
the aspirations for virtue and the wellbeing of human- 
ity, in fact the whole purpose, the only raison d'etre 
of the world, with all its complexities of physical struc- 
tures, with its grand geological progress, the slow 
evolution of the vegetable and animal kingdoms, is 
the development of the human spirit in direction of its 
perfect and perpetual happiness. Professor Wallace 
has no suggestions to offer on the reconstruction of 
the universe, although he recognises his utter inability 
to explain away the fact that pain and pleasure are 
not one and the same thing — a conclusion to which 
many philosophers, chiefly Hegelians, give their sup- 
port. For viewing any and all sensations in man as 
conditioning some immediate or future beneficent ob- 
ject. Professor Wallace was but carrying out the a 
priori assumption of God's benevolence to its legiti- 
mate end when he stated that beings thus trained and 
strengthened by their surroundings, are surely des- 
tined for a higher and more permanent existence than 
the one in which they now live, and we may confi- 
dently believe, he concludes, with our greatest living 
poet : 

" That lite is not as idle ore. 

But iron dug from central gloom. 
And heated hot with burning fears, 
And dipped in baths of hissing tears, 

And batter'd with the shocks of doom 

To shape and use." 

There can be no philosophy of life more sound and 
rational than that one, which being designated "Op- 
timism," traces in the method of the universe, the 
benevolence of God, and dares to affirm that all things 
work together for good — that love and the issue of 
the universe is correlative and at one — that our pleas- 
ures are proportioned to the planes upon which we 
live — that our wills are ours we know not how per- 
haps, but they are ours to make them what God in- 
tended they should be. Into this obscure realm of 
thinking, where many intellectual giants have become 
lost, where many millions of earth's children have 



buried their hopes in despair and where rehgion has 
proven in many instances to be but a will-o'-the-wisp 
to tempt man to leap from the edge of a sword into a 
fool's paradise, Shakespeare flashes a light when he 
says : 

" There is nothing good or bad, 
But thinking makes it so." 

The whole scheme of life — whatever may be the 
issue — is a fatality approved if not ordained for the 
wellbeing and eternal happiness of mankind. And it 
is a matter of small importance whether we stand 
weeping in utter despair at the order of the universe, 
or whether like a famous Athenian philosopher we 
laugh at the follies of man ; for by taking thought we 
cannot add one cubit to our stature nor change the 
universe one iota, and we act and shall continue to 
act, whether through wisdom, sophistry, or prompted 
by our mechanism, forever in the direction of perfect 
happiness. For this end Professor Wallace seems to 
believe our life is destined. And judging by the efforts 
which many are making to-day to develop paradise 
among us, we are on the high way to a joy in which 
many instead of a few will find satisfaction, and by 
which " Darwinism " truly shall see its final earthly 


The Voice of New York has published a symposium on the 
question " Should ethics be taught in our Public Schools ? If so, 
How ? " The answers given are mostly affirmative, yet they vary 
greatly concerning the method of teaching ethics. The answers 
follow here in concise extracts. 

Mr. Amos M. Kellog, editor of The School Jouninl s^ys, "A 
school that does not teach ethics or morality is to be avoided." A 
moral act is defined as " a fitting act. It fits the case we are in 
that we reverence our maker," etc. "Happiness and joy come to 
those who do the fitting thing." 

The editor of The Open Court demands that all instruction 
should be education, and the purpose of all education is to teach 
man right conduct. Special lessons in morality might be helpful, 
but since nothing is so apt to become tiresome as moralising, espe- 
cially gifted teachers would be required. Morality being applied 
religion, a difficulty in teaching ethics naturally rises wherever 
people have different religions. The introduction of ethics in our 
public schools will accordingly lead to a neglect of the properly 
sectarian element of religious doctrines and gradually produce a 
common and universal religion. This will be the Religion of 

Dr. R. B. Westbrook, the President of the American Secular 
Union advocates the teaching of secular morality in our state 
schools. "There is in every child," he says, " a natural sense of 
oughtness, of duty ; to do right because it is right and because it 
is most conducive to happiness. To avoid wrong because it is 
wrong and is sure to result in misery ; this constitutes natural 
morality — that is secular morality ; and there is no other." 

John Bacon, D. D., Ex-President of the Wisconsin State Uni- 
versity, recognises the need of teaching ethics. Concerning the 
how to teach it, he emphasises the spirit in which the daily duties 
are performed and the healthy tone of the school sustained. Moral 
teaching should be " constant but never obtrusive." The teachers 
must freely use " the spiritual convictions." It is a folly for the 

teacher to neglect the religious impressions, and it is still greater 
folly to require him to pass them by. 

Professor Felix Adler, of the Society for Ethical Culture, ex- 
presses his unwillingness to join in the discussion, because "the 
time has not yet come for the public agitation of this matter." 
The right text-books must first be written and if ethical teaching 
is prematurely introduced into the public schools, it will become a 
source of danger. Sects will try to introduce their sectarian re- 
ligious teachings, or it may also be used by crude radicals to intro- 
duce radical ideas under the cover of moral teaching. The kind 
of moral instruction given in the public schools should be strictly 
and absolutely neutral with regard to all questions of metaphysics 
and theology. Prof. Adler advises us to proceed with great cau- 
tion in agitating this matter. 

The Rev. Charles G. Ames, of Boston, says: "The ethical 
element enters synthetically as oxygen into the air we breathe. To 
administer it separately has not been found to agree with the con- 
stitutional craving of children who hate preachiness." The moral 
sentiments require gracious, tender handling, and are touched most 
powerfully (i) by a loving personality, (2) by the atmosphere and 
sunshine of good example, (3) by the continuous discipline of ac- 
tive duty. 

Mr. Austin Bierbower of Chicago, 111., the author of a text- 
book on ethics, says : " It is not necessary to teach religion in the 
public schools even if religion be necessary for moral training. . . . _ 
While religion presents a basis for morality, and offers some addi- 
tional motives, these can be taught in connection with the teaching 
of religion (in the church and Sunday school) and need not be 
presented in the teaching of ethics any more than the metaphys- 
ical basis need be taught, or any more than the religious bearings 
of geology need be taught in teaching that science." 

Mr. T. B. Wakeman desires that "we should have a secular 
system of education, just as we have a secular system of govern- 
ment. . . . But it is said that a general agreement cannot be ob- 
tained as to the means of such education. Let us try and see it ! " 

Mr. B. O. Flower, the editor of The Arena, says ; "The great 
fundamental principle of morals can be developed independent of 

any dogmatic or theological speculations To most effectually 

teach ethics in schools it seems to me that we should have a sys- 
tematic course of training in which the cardinal virtues should be 

impressed on the plastic mind of the child Next we could 

have ethics laid down in text-books and illustrated by striking in- 
cidents in history and biography." Music and hygiene should 
also form a part of the ethical education. 

Josiah Strong, D. D., Secretary of the Evangelical Alliance, 
demands that Church and State be kept entirely separate, but that 
we must distinguish between church and religion. Ethical instruc- 
tion in the public schools, he says, " cannot even be avoided. . . . 
Ought ethical instruction to include religion ? I answer no, not 
for the sake of religion ; and yes, for the sake of morals Re- 
ligion alone affords adequate motives to the practice of moral pre- 
cepts " — these motives being "the existence of God, the immor- 
tality of man, and man's accountability." 

The Rt. Rev. Thomas Preston, a Catholic prelate, says that 
" morality and religion cannot be properly separated .... ethics 

must be taught and with it the principles of religion But 

ethics cannot be taught in the public schools without offending 

many citizens who support these schools They must be 

stripped of every reference to ethics or moral principles, and so- 
ciety must look out for itself as to the observance of its own laws." 

Mrs. Abby Morton Diaz shows a strong antipathy to text- 
books. " Text-books ?" she says. "Printed lessons in morals ? 
By no means 1 " 

J. W. Bashford, D. D., President of Ohio Wesleyan College, 
says ; ' ' Ethics rest upon a scientific basis and scholars have as 
much right to be taught this as any other science We ac- 



cept Daniel Webster's authority that the state has not abandoned 

all moral functions It is not inconsistent for the teachers of 

the state to recognise the existence of God." As to ethics, he adds, 
"I prefer it to be taught only incidentally and in a fragmentary 

* * 

Does not this symposium prove that we cannot teach ethics 
without coming in conflict with some religious views ? Indeed we 
cannot teach ethics without teaching religion — religion being the 
basis of moraltity. 

By religion we do not understand a system of church doc- 
trines, not the sectarianism of special revelations. Religion is 
cosmical in its character. We may briefly define religion as our 
aspiration to live in accord with truth. There is but one religion, 
viz. that of truth. There are not several contradictory truths, 
there is but one truth, and we have to search for truth, to inquire 
into it, to reason it out with all the means at our disposal, in a 
word we have to find it just as we have to discover natural laws. 

The attempt to teach ethics — so-called pure ethics — without 
finding out the facts upon which ethical rules of conduct are 
grounded, without having first discovered the natural laws of 
ethics, will be of little use. It would be like teaching descriptive 
geometry to pupils who have no idea of geometry itself, its defini- 
tions, its theorems, and its methods. On the other hand it will 
be found to be impossible to teach ethics and leave religious doc- 
trines alone. Ethics is not based upon theological speculations, it 
is not based upon dogmatical religion. But for that very reason 
rational ethics must come into conflict with the irrational ethics of 
an erroneous religiosity. There are enthusiasts who believe that 
ethics can be taught without coming in conflict with religion (viz. 
dogmatic religion). They are as much mistaken as would be an 
advocate of republicanism in a country where there are several 
royal and imperial pretenders to the throne, trusting that the re- 
public can be introduced without coming in conflict with the as- 
sumptions of the pretenders. Religion has no sense unless it be 
a guide through life, a regulation of conduct, a basis of ethics. 
The Rt. Rev. Thomas Preston is fully consistent when he declares 
that morality and religion cannot be properly separated and ethics 
cannot be taught in the public schools without offending many 
citizens who support those schools. 

Let us not disguise the truth and let us plainly understand 
the consequences of this proposition. Ethics based upon the facts 
of life, natural ethics, or ethics as a science (whatever you may be 
pleased to call the ideal of humanitarian morality) will introduce 
a new religion, or rather it will purify and reform the old views. 
It will destroy their errors, their superstitions, their paganism, 
yet it will bring out more clearly than ever the purely religious 
kernel of the old religions, it will widen the sects into truly cos- 
mical congregations, not pretending to be catholic, but being 
catholic, in the original sense of the word. 

What will decide the final outcome of this problem that now 
agitates so powerfully the public mind ? The answer is very sim- 
ple. The question will be decided by a survival of the fittest. If 
ethics can be taught only through the instrumentalities of church 
doctrines, the old dogmatic religions will survive. If ethics can 
best be taught without inquiring into the why of ethics, without 
basing it (assisted by either science or religion) upon any founda- 
tion, pure ethics will survive. But if it is possible to base ethics 
upon the data of experience so as to derive the rules of conduct 
from the facts of reality, we shall see in the near future the rise of 
the religion of science. If the religion of science is possible, (not 
a religion according to the views of Auguste Comte which is arti- 
ficial and an imitation of Romanism, but a simple religion of 
truth,) if it be possible to transform and to reform any old religion 
so as to become a religion of science whose highest doctrine is to 
find the truth and to be guided by the truth alone, there is no 

doubt that this religion of truth will conquer in the end. It will 
prove in the long run the strongest, it will come out victorious in 
the struggle with its competitors and it will be the fittest to sur- 



To the Editor of Tlie Open Court : — 

It is one of the strangest inconsistencies of our age, perme- 
ated as it is with philosophic tendencies, that notwithstanding the 
extraordinary confusion which arises whenever Metaphysical, 
Psychological or Philosophical questions are discussed, — owing to 
the extreme ambiguities of language, — there has as yet never been 
any persistent attempt to remedy the evil. I say no persistent at- 
tempt, because although one very vigorous effort has been made 
it has unfortunately never been seconded. Why it should be so, 
it is hard to say. It is true that metaphysicians with a strong 
theological bias, (I prefer the term theological to dualistic, be- 
cause it more clearly indicates the real animus which induces 
certain writers to do their best to perpetuate the confusion,) would 
find their occupation gone if the nomenclature of philosophy were 
made as precise as that of science. 

The one effort to secure greater precision in the use of terms 
was made by George Henry Lewes ; indeed it was an aim he 
never ceased to have in view in all his philosophical writings. 
Many before him had complained of the ambiguities of language, 
— even among those who profited by the confusion, — but by no 
one has the resulting mischief been so clearly pointed out, and by 
no one beside him has such an effort been made to remove it. 

Lewes says, " Physical Basis of Mind," p. 322, of the principal 
psychological terms, for example: "They are employed by dif- 
"ferent writers, and are understood by different readers, in widely 
" different senses ; they denote and connote meanings of various 
"significance. All physicists mean the same thing when they 
"speak of weight, mass, momentum, electricity, heat, etc. All 
"chemists mean the same thing when they speak of affinity, de- 
" composition, oxygen, carbonic acid, etc. All physiologists 
" mean the same thing when they speak of muscle, nerve, nutri- 
" tion, secretion, etc., but scarcely any two psychologists mean 
" precisely the same thing when they speak of sensation, feeling, 
"thought, volition, consciousness, etc., and these differences of 
" connotation and denotation lead to endless misunderstandings." 
In another place he admits that "language was formed long before 
" psychology began to interpret mental processes ; we have to ac- 
" cept the terms in use, all that we can do is to point out their am- 
" biguities." 

There cannot be any doubt that one of the most, if not the 
most ambiguous of these terms is the term Consciousness, So all 
pervading is the mischief resulting from the different senses in 
which this word is employed that I am induced to quote once 
more Lewes's condemnation of it. He says (" Problems," Vol. 
iii, p. 143) : " Whoever reflects on the numerous ambiguities and 
" misapprehensions to which this term gives rise will regret that it 
" cannot be banished altogether, but since it cannot be banished, 
" our task must be to attempt to give it precise meanings. Generally 
" the term is synonymous with feeling, i. e. sentience ; only in this 
" sense may we define psychology to be the science of the facts of 
"consciousness." Now it is in this sense that Lewes believes it 
would be wise not to employ the term at all, although he adds (p. 
152): " Having thus endeavored to explain why it is desirable 
" not to make the term conscious states and sentient states equiva- 
" lent, ... let me now add that it will be difficult if not impossible 
"to avoid the occasional use of the term consciousness as the 
" equivalent of sentience owing to the language of philosophers 
" and ordinary writers having so thoroughly identified them." 



Mrs. Alice Bodington (Tlu- Open Court, No. 184) is so far right 
then in thinking it would have been better to replace both sensi- 
bility and consciousness by the Anglo-Saxon word " feeling," 
though even here we should not altogether escape analogous am- 
biguities. Sentience (as the subjective aspect of sensibility) would, 
I think, be better still, and then — as Mrs. Bodington will, I think, 
perceive^-she v'ould be absolutely correct in declining to "see 
any br^ak througliout the animal kingdom." "Consciousness 
(sentieni^e) is found from the protozoon to the human infant ; and 
as the brain (nervous mechanism) of the infant matures, gradually 
expands in the highest cerebral centres into self-consciousness 
(into the full light of consciousness)." 

Mrs. Bodington " cannot conceive of sensibility without con- 
sciousness." This obviously depends upon whether consciousness 
is used in the wider or more restricted, special sense. That the 
" limb " below the seat of injury in the spine exhibits sentience is 
obvious, but that it should exhibit consciousness is impossible 
jt'since it is severed from the organ of consciousness as completely 
as if amputated. 

I have to thank Mrs. Bodington for her extremely courteous 
reply to my criticism, which I assure her was not penned with the 
view of inflicting any " vexation " ; nor are the further remarks I 
would beg to offer upon one or two points in her present letter. Mrs. 
Bodington defines "sensibility as the function of the peripheral 
sensory nerves which convey impressions made by the outer world 
to the mysterious energy we know as consciousness." Will Mrs. 
B. pardon me if I ask her to reflect for awhile on this use of the 
word " energy " as a synonym for consciousness ? I would also 
ask her to consider whether it is really desirable to " restore to its 
old dominion " the idea of " a simple supreme ego " as an "en- 
tity." I put the queries with all respect, and with a good deal of 
confidence, because Mrs. Bodington herself displays so well the 
true scientific spirit when she says that " it is not what one would 
like to be true, but what is in point of fact the truth." 

J. Harrison Ellis. 


Dramatic Sketches and Poems. By Louis J. Block. Philadel- 
phia ; J. B. Lippincott Co. Chicago : A. C. McClurg & Co. 

This is a very pretty book, finely printed and elegantly bound. 
Its contents are of unequal merit. As verses they are well enough, 
but some of them will hardly rank as "Poems." They are lame 
in the feet ; having too many, or too few. Prose versified remains 
prose, even when the metre is even and the cadence true. The 
tone of these verses is good, although their time, is often bad. 
They soar aloft at the beginning, but seem unable to stay long 
upon the wing, and drop like a wounded bird. For instance, in 
the verses to "Success" ; 

" He has failed, you say : 

From the rise to the set of day 

His name is not heard : 

He has abandoned liis lofty schemes 

He is lost in idle dreams. 

The event has not occurred. 

His star is not seen in the sliy 

There is nothing left him save to die." 
Now, if the beginning of that were accepted as good poetry, the 
sixth line would convert it into feeble prose, "The event has not 
occurred." "Wild wind of the North," ends better than it begins, 
and most of it is of a higher quality than much that passes for 
poetry in these days. The same praise may be given to some 
other pieces in the book ; but what shall be said of this, the con- 
clusion of "Resurgence"? 

"Take thou the day and the hour ; what though the sun is 
hidden, what though the clouds are weaving their gray and gloomy 
engirdment for the pale welkin, what though the air is solemn and 

heavy, life, and time, and labor remain thee, and, in the spring- 
time, swift memorial gleams of the sweet-voiced times which re- 
turn not, clouds in flocks o'ertravelling the deep blue concave, 
blossoms, birds, and winds, in whose hearts reposes the measure- 
less sunshine." 

All that is prose ; its incoherency in places does not convert it 
into poetry, neither does the breaking of it into blank verse. 
Some of the pieces give promise that the author will do better by 
and by. M. m. t. 


Rev. J. C. F. Grumbine proposes in the present number his 
optimistic views concerning evolution as well as the Deity that 
shaping the ends of our destinies produces evolution. He bases 
his belief upon the authority of Professor Wallace and his trust in 
the benevolence of God — which latter, however, is the assumption 
to be proved. Mr. Grumbine's philosophy "dares to afhrm that 
all things work together for good " and by good is apparently un- 
derstood "happiness." This view is a modernised Deism which 
we are fully convinced is untenable, in its crudest form of the 
eighteenth century as well as its more refined form of the nine- 
teenth century. The idea of a benevolent Deity (whatever that 
term may mean, either a personal God or the factors of evolution 
in nature) stands in a palpable contradiction to the facts of all ex- 
perience — if benevolent means that God cares for the sufferings of 
his creatures and wills their happiness so as to procure as many 
pleasures for them as possible. God, or nature, or the factors of 
evolution take care that there is no stagnation in life, in history 
and in evolution in general. Far from being benevolent, the Deity 
of the world is stern to cruelty. We have more fully expressed 
our view on the subject in a former article of ours, ' ' The Rise of 
Consciousness, " pp. 363-369 of The Soul of Man. 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 


GHOSTS 2811 


Holland 2S12 

WALLACE ON DARWINISM. J. C. F. Grumbine 2813 



Sensibility and Consciousness. J. Harrison Ellis. . . . 2817 


NOTES 2818 

— ' thIj .rj 



The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion with Science. 

No. 196. (Vol. V.-14 ) 

CHICAGO, MAY 28, 1891. 

( Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



It should be remembered that in no religion was 
the abyss which separated the Divine from the human 
greater than in that of the Jews. Their conception 
of the Divine was completely transcendent. The idea 
of anything approaching deification was blasphemy in 
the eyes of the Jews. Adam, though created by Jeho- 
vah, was never called the Son of God, in a genealog- 
ical sense, except in the Gospel of Luke, and that 
Jesus called himself the Son of God was enough to 
condemn him to death. It was among the Jews where 
the two ideas of the Divine and human had been most 
widely wrenched apart that we witnessed the strongest 
reaction. The desire for nearness to God, likeness to 
God, oneness with God, might be suppressed for a 
time, but it was always there. Though the Jew lay 
prostrate before Jehovah, yet his heart always panted 
for him ; and it was the Jew who, in the great history 
of the world, was destined to solve the riddle of the 
Divine in man. It was the soil of Jewish thought that 
gave birth to the truest conception of the relation be- 
tween the Divine in nature and the Divine in man. 

In what I am going to say I shall pay little regard 
to the miraculous events in which the birth of that 
concept was supposed to have been manifested. What 
are those miraculous wrappings to us ? When the 
Divine in the outward world had once been fully rec- 
ognised there could be nothing more or less Divine, 
nothing more or less miraculous either in nature or in 
history. Those who assigned a Divine and miraculous 
character to certain consecrated events in the history 
of the world only, were in great danger of desecrating 
thereby the whole drama of history and of making it 
not only profane but godless. 

Is this a pantheistic view ? It is pantheistic in the 
best sense of the word, so much so that any other view 
would soon become atheistic. The choice lies be- 
tween pantheism and atheism. If anything, the 
greatest or the smallest, could ever happen without the 
will of God, then God is no longer God. To distinguish 
between a direct and indirect influence of the Divine, 
to admit a general and a special providence, is like a 
relapse into polytheism, a belief in one or many gods. 

* From the last Gifford Lecturi 
Christian World. 

report of which appeared first 

What we call Christianity embraced several funda- 
mental doctrines, and one of these is the recognition 
of the Divine in man, or, as we call it, the belief in 
the divinity of the Son. The belief in God, in God 
the Father, or the Creator and Ruler of the World, had 
been elaborated by the Jews. It was ready to hand. 
Greek and Roman, most of the civilised and uncivil- 
ised nations of the world, had arrived at it. But when 
the founder of Christianity called God his Father, and 
not only his Father, but the Father of all mankind, he 
no longer spoke the language of the Jews. For them 
to claim divine sonship would have been blasphemy. 
Nor should he spisak the language of the Greeks. To 
them divine sonship would have meant no more than 
a miraculous mythological event, such as the birth of 
Hercules. He spoke a new language, a language 
liable, no doubt, to be misunderstood, as was all lan- 
guage, but a language which to those who understood 
it had imparted a new glory to the face of the whole 

It is well known how this event, the discovery of 
the Divine in man, which involved a complete change 
in the spiritual condition of mankind, and marked the 
great turning point in the history of the world, had 
been surrounded by a legendary halo, had been ob- 
scured and changed into a splendid mythology, so 
that its real meaning had often been quite forgotten, 
and had to be discovered again by honest and fearless 
seeking. Christ had to speak the language of his time, 
but he gave a new meaning to it ; and yet that lan- 
guage had often retained its old discarded meaning in 
the minds of his earliest, nay sometimes of his latest, 
disciples alsio. The Divine Sonship of which he spoke 
was not blasphemy, as the Jews thought ; it was not 
mythology, as so many of his own followers imagined 
and still imagine. 

The two words Father and Son seemed the best 
known of our language, and yet it would be difficult 
to find two words more full of mystery even in their 
everyday acceptation. Nothing seemed more natural 
than to apply these words to God and man. The ex- 
pression had become so familiar that we hardly real- 
ised that it is, and could only be, a metaphor. And 
yet it was really the boldest metaphor in the whole of 
human language. 

True sonship depended on knowledge. A man 


might be a son of a king, but if he was brought up by 
an old shepherd with his other children he was a shep- 
herd boy, not a prince. And yet as soon as he dis- 
covered and knew that the king was his father, and 
not the shepherd, he at once became a prince, he felt 
himself a prince, the son of a king. It was in the 
same way that man must discover that God is his 
Father before he could become a son of God. To 
know was here to be ; to be to know. No mere mir- 
acle would change the shepherd boy into a prince ; no 
mere miracle would make a man the son of God. That 
sonship could be gained through knowledge only, 
through man knowing God, or, rather, being known 
of God, and till it was so gained it did not exist even 
though it be a fact. 

If we apply this to the words in which Christ spoke 
of himself as the son of God, we should see that to 
him it was no miracle, it was no mystery, is was no 
question of supernatural contrivance, it was simply 
clear knowledge ; and it was this self-knowledge which 
made Christ what he was, it was this which consti- 
tuted his true, his eternal divinity. What could be 
clearer than the words of Christ himself — "No man 
knoweth the Son but the Father ; neither knoweth 
any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomso- 
ever the Son will reveal him." 

But though Christ used the homely words father 
and son, he himself warned the disciples against the 
wrong use of these words. " Call no man your father 
upon earth, for one is your father, which is in heaven. " 
Could anything be clearer and stronger ? Instead of 
saying as we would say, " Call not God father, because 
father means your father upon earth," he said, "Call 
no man father, for father has now assumed a new and 
higher meaning, and can no longer be used in its old 
familiar sense." 

Those who have learned to look upon Christianity 
not as something unreal and unhistorical, but as an 
integral part of history, can see how all the search- 
ing after the Divine and Infinite in man is fulfilled 
in these simple utterances of Christ. For we must 
never forget that it was not the principle object of 
Christ's teaching to make others believe that he only 
was divine, immortal, or the Son of God. He wished 
them to believe this for their own benefit, for their 
own regeneration. Thus we read, " As many as be- 
lieved him to them gave he power to become the sons 
of God." 

It might be thought at first that this recognition of 
a Divine element in man must necessarily lower the 
conception of the Divine. And so it did in one sense. 
It brought God nearer to us ; it brought the Divine 
from the clouds to the earth. It bridged over the abyss 
by which the Divine and human were completely 
separated in the Jewish and in many Pagan religions. 

It rent the veil of the temple. This lowering, there- 
fore, was no real lowering. It was an expanding of 
the concept of the Divine, and at the same time a 
raising of the concept of humanity, or, rather, a re- 
storation of what is called human to its true character, 
a regeneration or a second birth, as it was often called 

by Christ himself. 

* * 

Objections will be raised against my line of argu- 
ment. It will be said on one side that I have deserted 
the impartial standpoint from which the student of 
the science of religion should never flinch, and that 
my chief object has been to magnify Christianity by 
showing that it was the fulfilment of all that the world 
had been hoping and striving for. In one sense that 
is true. But if I hold that Christianity has given the 
best and truest expression to what the old world had 
tried to express in various and less perfect ways I have 
at least given the facts on which I rely. If my facts can 
be proved to be wrong my conclusions will fall, and 
if any better expression could be given to what the 
witness within calls the truth I shall be most ready to 
accept it. Nor shall I ever wish to convey the im- 
pression that because the teaching of Christ is true, 
therefore all the teachings of other religions are false. 
On the contrary, I hold with St. Augustine that there 
is not one which does not contain grains of truth. 

But I expect even stronger objections from the op- 
posite side. So far from accepting the exalted posi- 
tion I assign to Christianity in the historical growth 
of religion, many theologians hold that Christianity 
stands altogether outside the stream of history, and 
beyond the reach of any comparison with other re- 
ligions. The true divinity which I have tried to show 
Christ claimed will not satisfy them at all. They 
want not a real but a miraculous divinity — a divinity 
not very different, in fact, from that which soon after 
his death was ascribed to Plato, as the son of Apollo, 
or which was claimed for other founders of religions. 
If people are satisfied with such a belief it probably 
contains all that they require and all they can com- 
prehend. I do not deny that they have a warrant for 
their belief in some of the earliest documents of the 
Christian Church. But the very fact that by the side 
of the synoptical gospels we find the Gospel accord- 
ing to St. John should teach us that here is a natural 
progress and easy transition from the one to the other, 
and that the same lesson might be conveyed to some 
in parables, to others in all plainness of thought and 



A Doubter lay dying. Life had been sweet and 
good to him, but much sweeter had it been to his dear 
ones, his friends and humanity. Peace, justice, and 



love had been the forms in which his daily service to 
duty and truth had been moulded. He had yoked 
himself to stars of right, true morality, and purity, the 
reins that held these brilliant steeds were in a master's 
hand, and to the goal of earthly happiness, — a con- 
sciousness of duty to right living, — they were unswerv- 
ingly driven. Had he a fault, — what mortal has not 
— but those who knew him best and loved him, found 
none. Those who knew him least, found fault because 
in his clear keen cut mind, theories, dogmas, creeds, 
and orthodox religions had vanished before doubt, 
even as mists before the morning sun. Intellectually 
as on a mountain top he had stood, and in this upper 
ether reason had wrestled with and dethroned ortho- 
doxy in the service of truth. 

Now doubting, this doubter died. The old slain 
enemy, orthodoxy, in pitiful despair now tried to ap- 
pear aghast, but one sweet Christian singer, who knew 
him well, and who had a wealth of human kindness in 
her soul, dared to confess in song : 

" Saying, 'There is no hope,' he stepped 

A little from one side and passed 

To Hope Eternal. At the last. 

Crying, ' There is no rest,' he slept. 

A sweeter spirit ne'er drew breath ; 

Strange grew the chill upon the air : 
But as he murmured, 'This is death,' 

Lo ! Life itself did meet him there. 

He loved the Will ; he did the Deed. 

Such love shall live. Such doubt is dust. 
He served the truth ; he missed the creed. 

Trust him to God. Dear is the trust." 

From whence the Hope Eternal ? Whither the 
rest ? Lo ! Where is the life to welcome death with? 
A dumb awful silence is the answer. The human 
breast, the heart, the desires, feelings, sentiments, 
longing for a Hope Eternal, make and create one for 
their own satisfaction. Wanting rest, imagine it can 
be found. Dreadful of the non existence after death 
of the ego earthly entity, picture an Olympus, a throne 
of Bramin, a home of Confucius, a Heaven, the Happy 
Hunting Grounds. But does a like to be believed in 
ideal create and establish a reality ? Do we know 
aught beyond life but that which the hope, which was 
evolved from the brain of humanity when earth was 
young, is fond of painting for itself, each different to 
suit each one's tastes? And so some singer has felt 
and to the world was conceived : 

gh, we weep. 

: deep ? 

No shore, shoal, or harbor, that faith and belief 
would paint us that we turn to for answer but back 
flies our own answer, "Alas! Not I." All further 
knowledge seems a sublime silence. To all presump- 

We are bor 

n, we laup 

We love. 

we droop 

Ah 1 Wher 

fore do w 

Why do \ 

ve live or 

who knows the secre 


Not I." 

tions of creed, sect, and dogma, back comes the hol- 
low echo of our own voices, "Alas ! Not I." How 
very careful and cautious the world's most honest and 
zealous searchers after truth are, to assert, if at all, 
that to them there exists only a belief in immortality. 

Why trouble the poor brain with a finite answer to 
an infinite riddle ? The facts ©f existence, whose self- 
differentiation, somehow, some way, live and breathe 
in the consciousness of each mortal, are, "we are 
born, we live, we die." Birth, life, and death, are the 
sole attributes of existence. Be that so, then it is be- 
come each one's right in turn to be well born, to per- 
form the duties of right living, and to die well in com- 

Orthodoxy asserts it is well enough to be a doubter 
in health, prosperity, happiness, and life, and pictures 
in fancy dread his hopeless statein sickness, misfor- 
tune, sorrow, and death. Tells of the purposeless 
life of the doubter, the hopeful state after probation 
to the believer. Rub the cob-webs from our eyes. Is 
it so ? No, it cannot be, in fancy, in ideal dwells our 
would-be conceptions or knowledge of the hereafter, 
in reality we live and duty to life enjoins us to make 
of life all we can. How much better it is to strive to- 
wards the completion of our most exalted efforts in 
right living, towards an industrious, honest, honor- 
able, temperate, charitable, pure, and true life, than 
by struggling after an imagined reward hereafter, of- 
ten regardless of the life lived. The .only real self- 
satisfaction in life is the good there is in the life we 

But then we die. And how does the doubter die? 

" Alas and yet alas. 
For glory of existence that shall pass I 

For pride of beauty and for strength of song ! 

Yet were the untried life a deeper wrong. 
Better a single throb of being win 
Than never to have been." 

The doubter dies contented, after a right life. 
Death's summons is obeyed unquestioningly, as the 
only proper culmination to life and he grieves not. 
Existence to be complete is recognised to contain but 
birth, life, and death. To live forever in the flesh 
were to war against nature and not reach the ultima- 
tum of existence. Life to be a perfect whole, to be a 
completed entity, must come to an end. The crown, 
the finishing point of life is death. To be born, our 
usefulness is ahead of us. To die our utmost living 
accomplishment is finished. Both are natural, both 
are good. Therefore the doubter mourns not, not as 
one without hope, but whose hope in death is only 
fulfilled. Born by inevitable laws, we live and die by 
laws as inevitable, all working towards an unity of 
completion, whether such be measured by an hour or 
three score and ten. Hence no matter how little or 
small a life may seem, it however contained everything 


needful to complete that one life, not a minute longer 
would have added any more of fulness to it. 

Nature makes no blanks, every life is a full exist- 
ence in accordance with all powerful and often unap- 
preciated laws. This alone would account for the fact, 
so often remarked upon, that a man or woman dies 
to-day and no matter how great, at once, the stream 
closes over the place occupied but a second before 
with scarcely a ripple. The cause, in death his or her 
life was completed, his or her work was finished, not 
another stroke of action was wanting, the world has 
no further need of his or her useful active existence. 
We may never know it, or appreciate it, but the full 
rounded life is the life it is given to each one to live, 
and just as he or she shall live it. When the time is 
reached, when the bounds are set, all living usefulness 
is ended. The utmost completion is reached by proof 
of death and the world is better off, richer with the 
memory, which then becomes an inheritance forever. 

The proof that all things are for good, somehow, 
some way, we believe has been the history of this uni- 
verse, mankind and nature, and convince us that the 
death of no man takes place unless it be towards more 
good than his existence. Then death is fruition. It 
is death that weaves a crown for birth and life. The 
parts are made whole, the unperfected is perfected, 
by death. The doubter feeling this, dies satisfied that 
his birth and life do thus reach full fruition and com- 
pletion, and dying pens for his tomb this inspired epi- 
taph, containing the glory of the only immortality he 
knows : 

" I was not and I was conceived, 
I lived and did a little work, 
I am not and I grieve not." 


The value of scepticism was the subject of discus- 
sion at the last meeting of the Evolution Club of Chi- 
cago. And it was a strange fact that almost all the 
speakers glorified scepticism as if it had been the 
cause of all progress, as if the human mind reached 
the climax of perfection in Doubt. 

This attitude, it seems to us, is based upon an 
erroneous conception of the function of doubt, and it 
is now so prevalent partly because the terms doubt 
and scepticism are often identified with any denial of 
certain religious beliefs, and partly because agnosti- 
cism, which despairs of a definite solution of the fun- 
damental problems of philosophy, is at present the 
most prevalent and fashionable world conception. 

In the addresses made, it was maintained that all 
success in life was due to doubt. Mr. Armour had 
doubted the propriety of the prevalent methods of dis- 
tribution in the meat-market ; and Charles Darwin had 
doubted the truth of the biblical account of creation, 
and lo! what were the results! Mr. Armour created an 

establishment which made meat cheaper all over the 
world, and Charles Darwin wrote "The Origin of the 
Species" and "The Descent of Man." One of the 
speakers defined doubt as the faith of a man in him- 
self and in his ideals, contrasting it with a blind faith in 
dogmas. But it strikes us that this view of doubt and 
scepticism is, to say the least, misleading. Doubt, 
real doubt, is unable to produce any results. The 
man who has a faith acts according to the faith that is 
in him. But the man who doubts is like Buridan's 
donkey who hungers between two bundles of hay so 
long as he remains in the agnostic state of not know- 
ing which bundle should be eaten first. 

It was maintained, likewise, that the times of 
scepticism had been the times of progress. This is 
true only if scepticism be identified with active thought. 
Goethe said, that the epochs of strong faith alone had 
been the periods of a strong activity, of progress, of 
creative thought, fertile with ideas and deeds. It is 
not true that Mr. Armour's doubt produced the new 
methods of the distribution of meat, it was his faith 
in the new methods and not his doubts as to the old 
methods that produced progress. The negative ele- 
ment of doubt, important though it may be as a tran- 
sient phase in the growth of our ideas, is not so im- 
portant as the positive element of a new faith for the 
creation of great things. It is most probable that the 
new faith in the truth of the evolution theory devel- 
oped in Dffrwin's mind long before his old faith had 
broken down, and it is not impossible that for a long 
time he did not even realise the full extent of the con- 
flict between the old and the new faith. Success after 
all is always due to faith ; and doubt is nothing but a 
state of suspense in which a new faith is struggling 
with the old faith, and only lasts so long as both 
faiths are sufficiently equal in strength to paralyze each 

An instance of the fashionable glorification of doubt 
is Mr. Wm. Arch. McLean's article "A Doubter's Hope 
Eternal," in the present number of The Open Court. 
The aim of doubt is always its annihilation. Prob- 
lems tend to be solved and the end of doubt should 
be their settlement. But here we are told that theo- 
ries and dogmas vanish in a clear and keen cut mind 
before doubt, even as mists before the morning sun. 
But if the old theories are not replaced by new and bet 
ter theories, — better because they are true, — it would 
seem as if we should rather compare the state of doubt 
to the mist. For if we are surrounded with a dense 
fog we cannot see, and only so long as we are in doubt 
do we answer "Alas ! Iknownot." It is strange, how- 
ever, that Mr. McLean's doubt is not at all a state of 
not knowing. He very soon becomes inconsistent 
with himself. As soon as he tries to describe his 
doubter's hope eternal it is noticeable that doubt is 



simply a wrong name ; for what he calls doubt is act- 
ually a new faith. His "doubter mourns not, not as 
one without hope," for he positively knows that "we 
live and die by laws as inevitable, all working toward 
a unity of completion " and " Nature makes no blanks," 
and death has also its place in nature. "It is death 
that weaves a crown for birth and life." A new faith 
is dawning on the intellectual horizon of mankind ; 
and whether the new faith should be considered as 
preferable to the old faith has, to the large masses of 
our people, not as yet been decided. Hence the prev- 
alence of doubt. This prevalent state of doubt is un- 
questionably the harbinger of better days, it is a sign 
of progress, it promises life and growth and evolution. 
But let us not make doubt the aim and end of thought. 
Our ideal is not the despair of an eternal scepticism, 
but the great hope of a new, of a better and a truer 
faith. p. c. 


in the lumber-room of the history of human thought or in the 
curiosity shops of philosophy. 

Col. Shipman, speaking of the "omneity of matter," says 
among other curious things ; — 


Colonel Paul R. Shipman wields a vigorous pen, and his 
onslaughts appear overwhelming. Yet I do not see that his crush- 
ing verdicts have any reference to me, since the monism criticised 
by him is not my conception of monism. Accordingly, in spite of 
my best intentions to enjoy another philosophical tilt with a man 
whose name is so honorably known among the authors of this 
country, I cannot rise in self-defence because my views have not 
been attacked at all. 

Did I ever speak of the " duality of atoms ? " I rarely speak 
of atoms, and if I do I am careful in pointing out that the term 
"atom " is a mere symbol to denote chemical equivalents whereby 
to describe the proportions in which the elements combine. The 
e.xistence of real atoms, i. e. of ultimate indivisible units, is not 
only unproved but even unthinkable. The philosophical idea of 
atoms is as untenable as, for instance, that of a round square, for 
it contains in itself contradictions. Rejecting atoms (not in a 
chemical but in a philosophical sense) still more must I consider 
" dual atoms " as an absurdity. 

Col. Shipman charges me with crude dualism, because I reject 
the idea that feeling is material, I do reject the idea that feeling 
is material, but did I ever declare (as Col. Shipman repeatedly 
maintains) that "consciousness is immaterial, and will material?" 
The contrast of these two propositions is just as nonsensical as 
each proposition in itself. There is no sense in calling conscious- 
ness and will either material or immaterial. Neither consciousness 
nor will has anything to do with matter ; both are non material. 
We might just as well propose a discussion of the problem whether 
ideas are green or blue. .\ny issue concerning the color of ideas 
would be no less futile than to speak of the materiality or imma- 
teriality of the will or of consciousness. ^ 

It appears to me that the difference between Col. Shipman 
and myself is primarily a difference of reasoning rather than of 
opinion. The Colonel overlooks the fundamental rules of philo- 
sophical propaedeutics, and this oversight produces as a secondary 
symptom a difference of opinion, Col. Shipman propounds a few- 
very strange maxims which have been held for some time as 
axioms by the materialist school, but are now only to be found 

' Mind is material." 
' Immaterialise consciousness and you 
' With immaterial things, if there are t 
to deny this is to cut loose from th( 
' Matter is the sheet anchor of fact 

olish matter." 
3 such things, science ha 
heet anchor of fact." 

* Col. Shipmiin's 
ch, i8gi. 

appeared in Secular Thought, Febn 

Col. Shipman's propositions about the "omneity" of matter 
and the materiality of mind remind me of a most interesting epi- 
sode in the history of philosophy. Feuerbach, the enthusiatic 
prophet of an idealised materialism, confounded thought with the 
phosphorous substance of the brain. His dictum has become 
famous. Without phosphorus, no thought. He declared that man 
is what he eats. Di:y MenscJi ist loas fr isst. The elevation of the 
soul, accordingly, should not be expected to be accomplished by 
the church, but by the kitchen ; die Kiic/ie and not die KircJie will 
save us. Why not feed on fish if in that way man can become a 
genius ? The progress of mankind would depend on more phos- 
phoric diet than meat. This was a queer perversion of thought in 
a brilliant mind which was aglow with a holy fervor for a religion 
of mankind ! Yet Feuerbach's materialism was outdone by Carl 
Vogt, one of the most ingenious, witty, and sarcastic writers of the 
nineteenth century, if not of all ages. Carl Vogt had a peculiar 
knack of being pointed in all his utterances, and he formulated his 
philosophy in words which stuck in the minds of the people, and 
have become famous all over the world. He said : Thought is a 
secretion of the brain. Thought stands in the same relation to 
the brain as gall to the liver and urine to the kidneys." 

Lotze wittily remarked in answer to this comparison, he had 
not known that the origin of thought was so uropoetical. Wolf- 
gang Menzel, however, a champion of the darkest orthodox Chris- 
tianity, but no less sarcastic than Carl Vogt, and often even more 
malevolent in his criticisms (for instance, of such men as Goethe 
and Schiller), declared he did not wonder that kidney secretions 
and thoughts were equivalent, at least in Carl Vogt, and he called 
him an untranslatable name which, mildly expressed, reminds of 
the famous fountain-statue in Brussels behind the Hotel de ville — 
so shocking to the English lady travellers. 

Incidentally it may be mentioned that Carl Vogt's idea had 
been expressed in almost the same words by Cabanis, who spoke 
of the brain as producing " la secretion de la pejisde" 

Before we expose the absurdity of this proposition, we must 
recognise its truth. Thinking, objectively considered, is as much 
as any other activity of the human organism, a physiological pro- 
cess. When a man thinks, we know that at the same time some 
material particles of his brain are in motion. Herein lies the 
correctness of Vogt's comparison, and herewith it ceases. For 
thought, unlike gall, is not a secretion. Gall is a substance, but 
thought is not a substance. Gall is a special kind of organised 
matter, but thought is no matter. If it were, we might bottle it 
or preserve it in tin cans. What a fine prospect to buy canned 
thought at the grocer's ! 

The fact is that thoughts are the subjective states of aware- 
ness which are felt when certain physiological processes take place 
in the brain. A pain which I feel when my skin is pricked is not 
a material thing ; it is not substance. Pains, pleasures, sensations, 
perceptions, thoughts, cannot be handled like pebbles or other 
material objects. It is true that pleasures and pains do not exist 
in absolute abstractness. There are no pains hovering in empty 
space like the ghouls and ghosts of old legends : there are no ideas 
flying about in immaterial nudity. All the ideas, the pains, the 
pleasures we know of are certain states of mind in real and actual 

We must not forget that our method of cognition rests on ab- 



straction. All our concepts, matter and mind included, are only 
symbols to represent certain features abstracted from the facts of 
experience. Our abstract concepts are not realities but ideas, 
mere noumena, things of thought, invented for the sole purpose of 
comprehension. When making abstractions, we limit our atten- 
tion to one special feature of a thing and exclude other features. 
When speaking of the matter of a thing, we exclude all its other 
properties. By the matter of which a human body consists, we 
do not understand its form, nor its life, the display of its activity, 
nor the feelings which ensoul its active brain, but simply the ma- 
terials of which it consists. If we speak of matter, we do not 
mean force. If we speak of force we do not mean matter. If we 
speak of form, we mean nothing but relation. If we speak of 
consciousness, or of feeling, or of thought, we have no reference 
to either matter or force nor . even to form. All these terms are 
different abstractions of one and the same indivisible reality. 
There is no force without matter, no matter without force, but 
matter is not force and force is not matter. A motion is a change 
of place ; and force is expended wherever a change of place oc- 
curs. The thing moved is material, but the motion itself is not 
material. When we speak of a man's ideas, we mean his ideas 
and not the material particles of his brain. If science had noth- 
ing to do with immaterial things, psychology would be no science, 
mathematics would be no science, logic and arithmetic would not 
either. And what is Col. Shipman's sheet anchor of fact, as he 
is pleased to call matter, but a mental symbol for certain features 
of our experiences ? It appears to me that mental apprehension, 
the most immaterial part of man's experience, is after all the 
"sheet-anchor of fact." To speak of the omneity of matter, to 
declare that force and feeling and consciousness and thought are 
material does not prove the boldness of freethought, it betrays an 
immature mind. To define matter as an all-comprehensive term 
which has to include all features of reality is an unjustifiable li- 
cense. Wherever this license is indulged in, it will be followed 
by a confusion of thought ; for it is an oversight of the most ele- 
mentary rules of philosophical propaedeutics. 

It is for this reason that one of the greatest chemists, a man 
who should know what matter is, (Baron Justus Liebig), desig- 
nated the materialists as philosophical dilettanti. And this judg- 
ment is partial in so far only as the same is true of the spiritual- 
ists who make spirit, and the Platonists who make pure forms, the 
all-embracing realities of the world. 

Matter, force, mind, spirit, form, feeling, are mere abstrac- 
tions. To look upon any of these in their kind most general terms 
as something else than terms or mental symbols, to look upon 
them as "omneities" or all-comprehensive realities, is a self- 
mystification and will lead either to occultism or to agnosticism. 
Indeed Col. Shipman's materialism is agnosticism. He looks 
upon matter as a mystery, and the mystery of matter, he says, is 
absolute. Yet this absolute mystery is to him the condition of 
knowledge ; it is the "sheet-anchor of fact." p. c. 


I HAVE the privilege of subscribing to one of the "great dai- 
lies " of Chicago, and I am continually edified by the ingenious 
manner in which it mixes politics and piety, especially in the Sun- 
day edition. Two or three Sundays ago there was a leading article 
in it, something in the style of a religious exhortation, reminding 
its readers of what they ought to give thanks for in their devotions 
on that blessed Sabbath day. In addition to other beatitudes con- 
ferred upon them as a "chosen people," they were devoutly ex- 
horted to be especially thankful to Divine Providence for the pros- 
pect of an abundant harvest in the United States, and a "shor- 
tage " of crops in Europe. The sentiment of that worship appears 
to be the ethics of Wall Street also, for in the North American 

Review for May, I find an article on "Our Business Prospects" 
written by Mr. Henry Clews, a man made of money, in which he 
prophesies "brighter business" for the remainder of the year; 
and he gives four reasons why, the second of which is this : " The 
evident prospect of good crops (for us), while the European crops 
are a partial failure." Thus do a false religious economy and a 
selfish political economy help each other, while moral economy 
teaches that every man is interested in the-welfare of every other 
man, and every nation in the prosperity of its neighbor. The 
famine of one country cannot be the nourishment of another ; nor 
can the United States ever grow rich on the poverty of Germany, 
England, France, or even of Timbuctoo. The Atlantic ocean, 
hearing that the Pacific had lost ten million tons of salt, might 
laugh at the calamity but in due time it would find itself a partner 
in that loss. And so it is with the great oceans of humanity ; and 
the multitudinous worlds. They are one. 

Prayers to God for exclusive personal favors and thanks for 
special gifts are of a doubtful morality. They narrow the soul 
and make religion sordid. They stimulate self-love and exalt 
vanity. They make the sorrows of others the joys of ourselves, 
and they reverse the commandment, " Love they neighbor as thy- 
self." Prayers for ourselves alone, for me and my wife, my son 
John and his wife, us four and no more, must weaken our sym- 
pathy for others, because within those prayers are the germs of 
envy, jealousy, and hate. When they develop a spurious patriot- 
ism they inflame the antipathies of nations. An old Greenwich 
pensioner who had fought in the wars with Nelson, confessed upon 
his dying bed that he had been a very wicked sinner ; and when 
his spiritual adviser tried to comfort him by reminding him that 
he had probably done some good in his time, he answered, "No 
Sir, not much ; I killed a Frenchman once ; that's all the good I 
ever done." This was no paradox, for his achievement was blessed 
in the English religion of his time. The National Anthem of Eng- 
land is a prayer, imploring God to " scatter " the enemies of the 
queen, and also to " confound their politics." Soon there will be 
no queen in England, nor any king, and then the national hymn 
will pray, if there shall be any prayer in it, that the politics of other 
nations may not be confounded but improved, so that they may 
establish righteousness. Who prays by generous deeds prays best, 
or in the words of Coleridge, " He prayeth best who loveth best "; 
and he who prays for others, will if a benediction comes in answer, 
surely get a share of it. Slowly but surely the religion of human- 
ity is rising above that insular theology which prays for an abund- 
ant harvest in America, and a ' ' shortage " of crops in Europe. 

* * 


It is related of Marshal von Moltkethat on his ninetieth birth- 
day he was presented with flowers and congratulations by some 
fair young ladies of Berlin, and in acknowledgement of their kind- 
ness he said, ' ' You make me wish to be young once more. " ' ' How 
young ? " said one of the girls. " Oh, about eighty," he replied ; 
and comparatively speaking, eighty would have been youth again 
to him. The secret of longevity appears to be hidden still among 
the occult sciences, and an inquisitive explorer has been trying to 
find it by searching among the lives of old men. He was disap- 
pointed, for their contradictory testimony would baffle a jury. It 
is thought uncivil to question women about their age, and the same 
rules of etiquette should apply to men also, for on that subject 
they are as sensitive as women. The bold explorer found it so ; 
for when he requested Senator Evarts to give him the recipe for 
long life, the senator who is only about seventy, told him to con- 
sult some older man. " Go to Senator Morrill," he said, " He is 
eighty-one." The interviewer went to Senator Morrill, but that 
aspiring young statesman told him to call again in about six years, 
"and perhaps by that time," he said, " I may be competent to 
form an opinion about longevity." To remind an old man of his 



age makes him older. Natural civility is careful on this point, 
although artificial gentility frequently offends by patronising old 
age in an awkward, amiable way. This explains the short and 
petulant answers the interviewer sometimes got. 

* * 

Do men inherit longevity ? If not, how shall we account for 
those weak, rickety persons who unreasonably continue to live in 
poor health for eighty or ninety years. And for those robust fel- 
lows who just as unreasonably die at fifty ? Here is an old man, 
hearty and strong, who accounts for his fine condition by saying. 
"For fifty years I have bathed every morning in cold water "; and 
here is another man of the same age equally strong, who explains 
the phenomenon by saying, "For fifty years I have never allowed 
cold water to come near me." One man attributes his long life 
to abstinence, another to indulgence; and as the jury cannot 
agree, the problem of longevity remains unsolved. The testimony 
of the patriarchs interviewed by the explorer that I spoke of, com- 
plicates the question more and more. Mr. Holman, a member of 
congress from Indiana, being about to celebrate his" golden wed- 
ding, thought that matrimony had a tendency to lengthen life ; 
but then again, the next witness. General Early, an older man 
than Mr. Holman, said he did not know whether matrimony had 
that effect or not, for he had never tried it. Mr. Holman also 
testified that the use of tobacco had a tendency to shorten life, 
but his testimony must be stricken out, because he added, "I 
have chewed the weed ever since I was a boy, and I am an invet- 
erate user of it still." There was a good deal of testimony against 
whiskey, and wine, and beer, but this was rebutted by Mr. Vaux, 
a member of congress from Pennsylvania, an antediluvian who 
sat in congress long before the war ; and he explained the secret 
of his longevity by saying, " As to my eating I do not take a great 
deal of food ; and as to drinking, I believe that whiskey is the 
basis of all good liquors and I confine myself to it. I take it 
straight, and I smoke on an average about twenty cigars a day. 
Also I believe every word that is between the lids of the bible. " 
To which of these three causes does Mr. Vaux attribute his length 
of days ? I should like to know whether he thinks his longevity 
is due to taking his whiskey straight, or to smoking twenty cigars 
a day, or to believing every word in the Bible. The symposium 
such as it was, tends to show how unreliable is the testimony 
even of experts on the subject of old age. 

The American idea of an " organ " is a newspaper devoted to 
the principles of a certain political party, when the party has any 
principles, and when it has none, to its measures and its methods 
right or wrong, especially the wrong. In England however, a 
party " organ" is literally a musical contrivance out of which the 
machine politician, by simply turning a crank, grinds campaign 
melodies, warranted strictly partisan. It is in fact an "organ" 
like the rasping torment which a brunette son of Italy is at this 
moment operating beneath my window. For political meetings 
those organs are very economical as they save the expense of a 
brass band ; but sometimes, like certain campaign orators, they 
strike the wrong " key note," arid get response in hisses instead of 
cheers. One of that kind was lately the subject of a lawsuit in 
London, the plaintiff, a maker of musical instruments, having 
made it for the Parnellites, who refused to pay for it. The de- 
fense to the action was that the machine was to be a reliable Par- 
nell organ, but when they began to grind the music out of it they 
found that it was a staunch McCarthy organ, and that it stub- 
bornly refused to play anything but heterodox McCarthy tunes. 
It was pleaded that the organ had been warranted to play the in- 
spiring anthems, "What should we do without Parnell," "Wait 
till we catch McCarthy," "Why we hanged Tim Healy," and 
other airs of similar sentiment ; whereas in truth and in fact, it 
refused to do so, but persisted in playing exasperating tunes of an 

opposite character. The plaintiff's reply was that the defendants 
did not know how to work the instrument, and therefore it had 
failed. This was probably correct, but the trouble would never 
have occurred had they employed one of our skillful politicians to 
grind the organ, for he would have drawn from its intricate wheels 
and springs any imaginable tune or tone that any imaginable au- 
dience might require. M. M. Trumbull. 



To /he Editor of The Open Court : 

Mrs. Susan Channing in her "The New Ethic of the Sexes. " 
The Open Court, May 7, says, "It is owing to virtue that we ex- 
ist." She uses the word, virtue, in its especial sense, i. e. mean- 
ing chastity, if judged by the context. She says also, " In pri- 
meval times, the tribes deficient in conjugal fidelity, and addicted 
to polyandry, reared no children, and were soon blotted out of 
the book of nature." 

There is no testimony that tribes addicted to polyandry reared 
no children. The testimony is that infanticide was not uncommon, 
owing to the sharp struggle for life, which was also at the root of 

The testimony of science concerning these assertions, is, as 
far as known to-day, that all peoples started alike in universal 
promiscuity, rising from that, by slow stages through a limited 
promiscuity, polygamy, and polyandry, to the communal, bar- 
baric and civilised family. f Virtue to-day, in the structure of the 
language of the Chinese, of the American Indian, and if the India 
Indian — the Dravidas, who number about thirty millions, — are 
found terms of relationship which fit the customs of polyandry. 
These terms exist as fossil relics, which proclaim past conditions 
of the society in which they were coined. In the speech or dia- 
lects of the Polynesian peoples, similar terms are not yet buried 
in the structure of the language, although the customs of that por- 
tion of the globe have risen somewhat above them, — and are no 
longer expressed by them. The Savage tribes of Oceanica are 
estimated as about one-fifth the population of the globe. While 
arrested development is at work among them, at least to the ex- 
tinction of the native Australian, it may largely be attributed to 
the porcity climatal or otherwise, inherent in their habitat. Ex- 
tinction of these ocean peoples must be very far off in time. 

It cannot be that societies become extinct, simply from ab- 
sence of chaste customs, or that they survive solely by the virtue 
in a high limitation of the sex relation, else how survives a society 
that furnishes employment to the Capt. Vernerses ? How survives 
a society such as that exposed awhile ago in the columns of the 
Pall-Mail Gazette, or, is indicated in the sexual relations set up in 
Africa by Caucasian traders and agents, who are seeking fortunes 
there ? In our commercial journals one may read of the enormous 
amounts of alcoholic liquors forced on the African natives, at the 
mouth of the cannon, as opium was on China at an earlier time. 
It is generally believed that the decrease in the native population 
of Hawaii dates from the advent there of trading vessels of the 
commercial nations importing alcoholic liquors, and the vices of 
white societies. 

If it were true that the extinction of peoples comes from ab- 
sence of the modern family relations alone, then all manufacturing 
nations are in the line of extinction. It is held by those who have 
deeply investigated the factory system of industry which has ob- 
tained in the United States for the last seventy-five years, and 
much longer in England, that it undermines home-life and the 
family relations. 

* See '• Life-History of Our Planet," Chap. VI, p. igi, on Man's Antiquity. 
tSee "Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge," 218, Ages of Barbar- 
ism, p. 497. 



The employment of women and children at inferior wages, 
displaces the full-paid man-worker, and he must go hither and 
thither, even across the seas it may be, to find a market in which 
he may sell his labor for a living price. The wife and mother 
away during working hours, the home is no longer home, and the 
ties centred there through generations of development, are weak- 
ened and must be finally uprooted. This destructive effect of the 
modern industrial system on the family relation has already be- 
come a theme of alarming interest in social science circles. It 
would seem that for the conservation of a people's life, other vir- 
tues must be added to that of chastity. Human Love came slowly 
out of primitive conditions and the family was founded. 

More slow to appear is Justice, which is the keystone of the 
Social Arch. 

Until that is set in its place the perpetuity of no social struc- 
ture is secure. Mary Gunning 

Chicago, May gth. '91. 


The Financial Problem, its Relation to Labor Reform and 
Prosperity, and Citizens Money. A Critical Analysis in 
the Light of Free Trade in Banking. By Alfred B. Westrup. 
Chicago : Mutual Bank Propaganda. 

These pamphlets contain the condensed arguments of the 
Mutual Bank Propaganda, in opposition to the National Bank 
system, and in support of what is called Free Trade in Banking. 
Mr. Westrup's doctrine is a revival of the ancient principle, that 
as money is only the representative of wealth, all wealth should 
be allowed to circulate as money through its representative ex- 
pressed in terms of dollars, and made of paper. The old position 
was that if a man owned a house worth five thousand dollars, he 
should be permitted to monetise it in the form of five thousand 
paper dollars, and use it in his business, or in any other way ; the 
house, of course, being the security to the holders of the five 
thousand paper dollars, and liable fortheirredemption. Thisappears 
to be very nearly the position taken by Mr. Westrup, excepting 
that instead of every man being permitted to coin his own house 
into money, the owners of a hundred houses would combine the 
value of them into the capital stock of a Mutual Bank. He re- 
quires that Banking be made as free as Bootmaking, and that the 
exclusive privilege to issue notes to circulate as money, now given 
to the National Banks, through the ten per cent, fine on others, 
shall cease. 

Mr. Westrup's monetary system is not at all a part of the 
"Greenback" plan, nor in harmony with it, for the freedom of 
his money necessarily requires the withdrawal of the " legal ten- 
der " privilege from all money of every kind, although Mr. West- 
rup does not say so. To make paper money is one thing ; to get 
somebody to take it is another ; and it is quite safe to say that the 
money of the Mutual Banks would be at a discount from the be- 
ginning, by reason of the insecurity of the security, which is to be 
' ' unincumbered improved real estate, never vacant lands. ' ' Improved 
real estate is poor security, for the improvements may burn down ; 
and this contingency alone would at once depreciate the money of 
the Mutual Banks. 

There is much in these pamphlets worthy of consideration, 
especially Mr. Westrup's criticism of certain economic supersti- 
tions, and our existing monetary system ; but it will be hard for 
him to convince the men of business that the substitute proposed 
by him is not open to more serious objections. M M. T. 

The Daughter, Her Health, Education, and Wedlock. Homely 
suggestions for mothers and daughters. By William M. Capp, 
M, D. Philadelphia and London: F. A. Davis, 1891. 
Says the author: "The ignorance concerning the simplest 

matters of personal and household hygiene and physiology even 

among those who have enjoyed fair opportunities to obtain a good 
education, is often most surprising." He presents in this elegantly 
bound little volume of 144 pages very concise information on these 
essentials of woman's education. He explains briefly the mother's 
task, the care of new born infants from the hour of their birth, 
the infant's bath, bottle-feeding, nursing the child, care of the 
nipples, medicines, rocking the baby, chafed skin, teething, air, 
habits, the child at school, boys, and girls, puberty, the sexual na- 
ture, household duties, coeducation of sexes, considering marriage, 
home-making, housekeeping, pregnancy, care of teeth and hair, 
preparation of food, the skin and bathing, and gymnastics. The 
little book does not pretend to give advice in abnormal and difficult 
situaticms, but it contains much valuable information of things 
which every woman ought to know and negligence of which often 
causes grave calamities. n. 

The Genius of Galilee. An Historical Novel. 'By Anson Uriel 
Hancock. Chicago : Charles H. Kerr & Co. Cloth $1.50, 
paper 50 cents. 

It is difficult to know how to describe this work. It is called an 
historical novel, and certainly a good deal of information, more or 
less historical, is interwoven with the narrative. In no other 
sense, however, can that character be ascribed to the story, unless 
the episode, contained in the fifth Book, relating to "the Genius 
of Galilee," can be so described. The narrative is chiefly con- 
cerned with the fortunes of an apocryphal sister of Joseph the 
father of Jesus, and its ideas, where they are fictitious, are essen- 
tially modern both in character and expression. There is but lit- 
tle flavor of antiquity. It is somewhat startling, moreover, to come 
across a reference to the moral peculiarities of Tolstoi and Zola, 
or even to the opinions of Gen. Lew Wallace and " the inimitable 
Thomas Hughes Q. C. " as to the childhood of Jesus, in a narrative 
of events happening at the commencement of the Christian era. 
The book is nevertheless well written, and it may answer the pur- 
pose for which it is intended. i2. 






All communications should be addressed to 

{Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 



Prof. F. Max Mueller 2819 


FAITH AND DOUBT. Editor 2822 


CURRENT TOPICS. Prayers For Ourselves. The Secret 

of Long Life. A Party Organ. Gen. M, M. Trumbull. 2824 



The Open Court 

M I THE- "1 


Devoted to the "Work of Conciliating Religion with Science. ^ — Chicago 


No. 197. (Vol v.— 15 ) 

CHICAGO, JUNE 4, 1891. 

( Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



A SPECIOUS plea in behalf of human selfishness is 
sometimes made on the ground that all human actions 
are necessarily selfish. Aside from those cases in 
which we are compelled against our will and which in 
the "strict sense of the word are hardly actions at all, 
it is held that all voluntary actions are done with a 
view to cur own pleasure or happiness. It is even 
said that we can no more help acting selfishly than we 
can help breathing ; that when we seem to be inter- 
ested in the welfare of another, it is because the other 
contributes to our happiness ; that we deceive ourselves 
in thinking we can act for the happiness of anybody 
but ourselves ; that if for example we give a quarter 
to a poor man on the street it is not for his benefit but 
for our own, since if we refused we might have dis- 
agreeable sensations afterwards. 

What is the truth in this? — for I suppose it may 
be taken for granted that any views honestly held by 
intelligent persons must have some truth in them. 
What is indisputable seems to me to be this — that we 
never do anything voluntarily unless we choose or 
prefer or please to do it. In fact, it is so clear that I 
suspect it comes near being tautological. When we 
speak of acting voluntarily, we f/iean acting according to 
our will or pleasure. Now from this truth the inference 
is drawn that we act /or our pleasure, — or, (since 
pleasure and happiness are at bottom the same thing) 
for our happiness. It appears thus to be a necessary 
law of our being that all actions are interested, their 
final end being in ourselves. Our own pleasure or 
happiness seems to be the only thing that can move 
the will to act ; if we care for others, it is only that 
this is one way of getting pleasure for ourselves. 

It must be admitted that there are considerable 
authorities for this view. Leslie Stephen, one of the 
first English writers on Ethics, says that "pain and 
pleasure are the sole determining causes of action."* 
A leading American sociologist, Lester F. Ward, de- 
clares that all actions "agree in having pleasure for 
their end," and that "benevolent and philanthropic 
actions are prompted like others by the motive of di- 
minishing disagreeable feelings experienced by those 

who perform them. " * Bain holds that there are " only 
two great classes of stimulants; either a pleasure or a 
pain, present or remote, must lurk in every situation 
that drives us into action, "f And Bentham asserted 
that "every human being is led to pursue that line of 
conduct which, according to his view of the case, taken 
by him at the moment, will be in the highest degree 
contributing to his own greatest happiness. "J 

None the less I ask, is it true that we always act 
for our pleasure or happiness? To act /or a thing is 
to act in view of it, is to act with it in mind, or to aim 
at it. Is it true that we always have pleasure or 
pleasures in mind when we are prompted to action? 
I think it more nearly accords with our ordinary con- 
sciousness and modes of speech to say that it is some- 
times the case that we desire certain things or objects, 
and while the getting them gives us pleasure, it is not 
so much the pleasure as the things we want. This 
seems to be true sometimes even of a desire like hun- 
ger. The satisfying of hunger generally brings pleas- 
ure, but it is not the pleasure the really hungry man 
is thinking of, but the food — it seems a direct appetite 
for an object. When we do think of \\if: pleasures of 
eating, this is not so much the primary as a secondary 
desire; and when a person thinks of almost nothing 
else (being perhaps so well-fed that he never expe- 
riences real hunger), we do not call him an excep- 
tionally hungry man, but a gourmand. § The same 
direct interest in an object sometimes shows itself in 
the business world. I was struck a few years ago by 
the language of the President of a bank that had 
failed. He said with a kind of mournfulness, " I was 
wedded to it always. To me my own pleasure was a 
second thought to its prosperity." Any of my readers 
can probably think of persons in these days of fever- 
ish competition who are so wrapped up in business 
pursuits that they scarcely think of themselves or their 
pleasure — do not, as we may well say, think enough. 
It is as if such persons put all that is commonly called 
pleasure or enjoyment to one side and set but one aim 
before them — that of making money. It is perfectly 
true to say that this is their choice, their preference, 

* Dynamic Sociology. 
t Emotions and Will, p. 460. 
X Constitutional Code, Introduction, § 2. 

S This point is worked out with admirable precision and delicacy by 
Sidgwick, Methods 0/ Ethics, pp. 44, 45 (3d ed.) 



their (in this sense) pleasure or happiness. But it 
hardly has sense to add that they act as they do for 
the sake of this pleasure, when all that is meant is that 
they act as they choose and it would be as rational to 
say that they act for the sake of their choice. In fact, 
this brings home to us that there is an ambiguity in 
the word pleasure and it is incumbent on us to trace 
it out if we do not wish to be led astray by words. 
Pleasure seems sometimes to indicate the mere fact 
of preference or choice. To say "I please to do a 
thing," or "it is my pleasure to do it," is the same as 
saying "I choose to do it ; pleasure here means a state 
of will. On the other hand, pleasure sometimes means 
a sensation — as when we speak of the pleasures of 
taste, the pleasures of exercise, the pleasures of study 
or the pleasures of doing good ; we mean here the 
agreeable feelings that follow any of these things, and 
the idea and expectation of which may of course move 
us to action. The two senses of the word point to 
different psychological states. Yet since we have the 
same word for them we glide from one to the other 
without being clearly aware of the difference. When 
we act as we please, or according to our pleasure, we 
think it must be the same, when anyone tells us so, 
as acting in view of our pleasure or for the sake of it ; 
yet in the latter statement, we use the word pleasure 
in one sense, (that of an agreeable feeling), and in the 
former, we use it in another sense (that of preference 
or choice). No one would say we act as we choose, 
for the sake of our choice, and yet we delude ourselves 
into thinking it is rational to say that we act as we 
please for the sake of our pleasure. It is only rational 
to make the latter statement, in case we understand 
by "please" one thing 'and by "pleasure" a quite dis- 
tinct thing. But the fact seems to be that we may act 
according to our pleasure (in the sense of choice) and 
yet for the sake of a hundred other things besides 
pleasure (in the sense of agreeable feeling). I have 
spoken of money-making ; but we may set before our- 
selves V ictory in some sport, or a position of power over 
others, or adding to the sum of knowledge in the world 
or the creation of objects of beauty or the advancing of 
social justice. For though from any of these objects 
once attained, there would doubtless come pleasure to 
us, yet we may scarcely think of the pleasure in the 
time, being completely absorbed in the pursuit of the 
objects themselves. 

Let me take a very simple illustration. A boy 
plays a game of ball ; he plays to beat — and he doubt- 
less thinks at the outset how fine i. e. how pleasur- 
able, it would be to beat. But he gets into the game, 
he warms up, he tries to make every step and move- 
ment count and to take advantage of every failure or 
weakness of the other side — and what is he thinking 
of now? Of the pleasurable emotions that will follow 

victory ? Perhaps not at all, but simply of winning 
the game. At any given moment, possibly not even 
of this, but rather of getting the greatest number of 
tallies for this inning, or even of simply reaching a 
certain base ; and if, while he is running for the latter, 
he allows himself to think of the pleasures of victory 
or even looks ahead to the winning of the game, his 
attention may be so divided as to hinder him from 
reaching the base. The truth is that instead of the 
pleasure of victory being the constant spring of his 
action, it may be su in the iirst place and then not be 
thought of again till the game is done. Can a person 
be properly said to be acting /^r that which is not in 
his mind — to be aiming at that which he is not think- 
ing of? This would be self contradictory. 

After all, is it not so familiar a truth that it is a 
commonplace, that pleasures are surest to come when 
we do not aim at them, that if we seek them we are 
apt to lose them ? How does this comport with the 
idea that we are always seeking our own happines and 
always must? The fact is that it is because men do 
not always seek it and sometimes forget it altogether, 
that they get most of the happiness that they actually 
possess. Without doubt benevolent individuals ex- 
perience agreeable feelings after doing kindly acts ; 
but it is possible that they experience them in an in- 
verse ratio to the extent they have distinctly expected 
or aimed at them. If we give a quarter to a poor man 
with no other motive than that of experiencing self- 
congratulation afterward, we run the risk of not ex- 
periencing self- congratulation at all; and our feeling 
may be instead, "What sophisticated fools we were 
to expect it ! " 

The facts compel us to go further. We may not 
only forget our pleasure and happiness, but we may 
voluntarily do things inconsistent with our pleasure or 
happiness, taken as a whole. It is not true to our ex- 
perience to say as Bentham does that we always act 
for what at least at the moment we think will con- 
tribute to our greatest happiness. It may possibly be 
rational to do this, but in fact we sometimes do the 
contrary. We may do things (for a present enjoy- 
ment) that we know will be followed by more misery 
than happiness ; a present craving may overrule the 
rational thought of our greatest happiness ; we may 
voluntarily let the latter go for the sake of the gratifi- 
cation now. The appetite for drink may so rule us ; 
we may be perfectly aware that for every moment of 
pleasure (in drinking) we shall have in time twenty 
moments of pain and none the less choose the present 
pleasure. John Stuart Mill admitted that men some- 
times " pursue sensual indulgences to the injury of 
health, though perfectly aware that health is the 
greater good."* Moreover, there is an experience of 



a different character in which we may act even against 
present pleasure. A distinction of consciousness has 
passed into common speech, namely, that between 
choosing to do a thing from " a sense of duty" and so 
choosing because we anticipate pleasure in so doing. 
In the latter case, we may need only to think of a 
thing to want to do it ; in the former, though reason 
and conscience approve, it may be hard to make up our 
mind. For example, one person finds pleasure in 
walking, or riding on a horse ; the idea has only to 
cross his mind at certain times to make him wish to 
throw up his books or his business and go out ins 
Freie. Another may recognise that the exercise would 
be good for him, may feel that he ought to go, and yet 
from absorption in his books or work, or perhaps 
from physical laziness, may be averse to going. 
Plainly these are different moods. Both may eventu- 
ally choose to take the walk ; but one from anticipa- 
tion of pleasure, the other from a sense of duty. 

Sometimes the nobility of a thing, aside from duty, 
may attract us and lead us to bear pain willingly for the 
sake of achieving it. Mrs. Browning says, "If heads 
that hold a rhythmic thought must ache perforce, then 
I, for one, choose headaches." 

This does not mean that headaches are ever agree- 
able sensations or that by willing we can make them 
so, but simply that we may choose them despite their 
disagreeableness for the sake of a higher good. So 
J. S. Mill somewhere says that the state of a discon- 
tented Socrates is better than that of a contented pig ; 
that is, in certain circumstances it is better to be un- 
happy than happy. And there have been not a few 
who have acted on this conviction. One feels in read- 
ing some of the leaders of modern scientific thought, 
Tyndall for instance, that the sacrifice of all things 
false, however pleasant they maj' be, is for them a 
paramount and primary duty. Romance and tragedy 
are full of situtions in which the longing for personal 
happiness goes down under the influence of a grander 
motion. Adam Bade resigns in his own mind the girl 
he loves because he sees his brother loves her and he 
will not stand in his way. Enoch Arden comes back, 
finds his wife married again and happy with her hus- 
band and children, and goes off without revealing him- 
self, rather than disturb their happiness. Fedalma, 
in what seems to me George Eliot's masterpiece. The 
Spanish Gypsy, chooses sorrow rather than a joy that 
destiny had made base for her. To her lover, whom 
she feels she must renounce for the sake of loyalty to 
her father and her tribe, she says : 

" O, all my bliss, was in our love ; but now / 
I may not take it ; some deep energy 
Compels me to choose hunger. 

Happiness seems to her in tlie crisis of her life to 
be a smaller thing : 

" I can never shrink 
Back into bliss,— my heart has grown too big. 
With things that might be." 

Will some one say. But she could not have chosen 
hunger and sorrow, had she not found pleasure in 
doing so, had it not on the whole made her happier 
to do so, and hence was she not after all seeking her 
happiness ? I simply answer. What is meant bj' pleas- 
ure or happiness here ? If the meaning is simply that 
this was Fedalma's free act, that so she preferred or 
chose or pleased to do, then the statement is indisput- 
able, since it is only saying that she could not have 
chosen unless she had chosen or wished to choose. 
But if "pleasure" is used in the sense of agreeable 
feelings, present or remote, then to say that she acted in 
anticipation of such feelings and for the sake of them 
is false. As a personality in the poem, her wishes 
were simply to be true, to be loyal to her tribe, and 
for the sake of that she consented and even welcofned 
the sorrow, hunger, and pain incidental to it. It is 
. darkening counsel with words, mere sophistication, to 
say that she was actuated by the thought of pleasure 
or happiness, when these only existed to her as things 
to be renounced. 

A man will even sacrifice his life, in those rare 
emergencies where some larger interest calls. When 
an engineer stays at his post in face of a collision, 
knowing that he may thereby help to save other lives 
though he may lose his own, has it not almost an air 
of burlesque to say that he acts so as to increase the 
number of his agreeable emotions, when he knows that 
all emotions may soon be forever at an end with him ? 
The glorious story of the Birkenhead has recently 
been recited by Geru M. M. Trumbull in these col- 
umns.* Certainly those men went down to their wa- 
tery grave because they chose to ; it was, in this sense, 
their pleasure, their happiness to. And yet the thought 
of pleasure or happiness probably never crossed their 
minds ; it was their duty they chose — and duty meant 
almost certain death. In view of such instances it is 
simply paradoxical to say that men always act with a 
view to their pleasure or happiness. I may make 
some remarks on the turning of this psychological 
mistake into an ethical theory in a subsequent article. 


Prof. Max Mueller's Gifford Lectures were the 
subject of acrimonious discussion in the latest monthly 
meeting of the established Presbytery of Glasgow, 
held on May 6, 1891. Rev. Dr. Watt who had been 
moderator up to date resigned the chair and Rev. Mr. 
Gillan of Carmunnock was elected in. his place. After 
the discussion of sundry other business which has no 

*The Open Court. Apr., p. 2759 



special interest for outsiders, the following resolution 
was moved by Mr. Robert Thompson : 

"Inasmuch as the teaching of Prof. Max Miiller, the Gifford 
"lecturer in the University of Glasgow, is subversive of the 
" Christian faith, and fitted to spread Pantheistic and infidel views 
"among the students and others, and inasmuch as it is question- 
"able whether the Senate has legal power to receive a bequest 
' ' such as Lord Gifford's, and to appoint a lecturer to carry out 
' ' the teaching of the same, the Presbytery appoint a committee 
" to examine the views of the Professor as set forth in his lectures, 
" and also to ascertain the Senatus's power in relation to the ac- 
" ceptance of the Gifford bequest and the appointment of a lec- 
" turer, and to report to a further meeting." 

Schopenhauer says, it is easier to burn a heretic 
than to refute his view. Since the stake has gone 
out of fashion, so called heretics are pooh-poohed and 
stigmatised as adversaries of Christ. Not the slight- 
est attempt is made to refute Prof. Max Miiller yet 
it is boldly maintained, as will be seen from the fol- 
lowing report, that only he is for Christ who will de- 
nounce Prof. Max Miiller's views. Mr. Thompson 
should not be so rash in identifying his own opinion 
with the cause of Christ. From the Christian stand- 
point we maintain that a man who thinks on religious 
matters as does Mr. Robert Thompson is a heathen 
and against Christ. Only he is for Christ who fear- 
lessly stands up for truth. 

We reprint the report of the meeting without fur- 
ther comments from the Glasgow Herald : 

In supporting the motion, Mr. Thompson said the university 
was set up to promote the liberal arts and sciences and to teach re- 
ligion within the university. There were ordained ministers of 
the Church within the Senate, and they by their presence at these 
lectures had been contributors toward the seducing of the students 
and others who had attended to hear the most extraordinary views 
propounded by the lecturer. These views were simply a rehash 
of German mysticism. Pantheism, and the old argument of the in- 
fidel Hume, combined with the refuse of the minds of all the pop- 
ulations of the world who had gone into every error in regard to 
the conception of God and the moral government of the universe, 
as well as its physical development. The lecturer had, besides, 
outraged Christianity by denying some of its fundamental doc- 
trines — the incarnation, the resurrection, and the ascension of 
Christ. Now, the Church of Scotland, he maintained, had power 
through its Church Courts to overhaul the Faculty of Theology 
in the university, and he asked the Presbytery to pass the resolu- 
tion he had submitted. There was no anathema pronounced 
against the professor. He simply asked them to appoint a com- 
mittee to inquire, and he held that if they were faithful to their 
ordination vows they were bound to do so. It would have been 
far better if this Edinburgh lawyer had at .some time had his money 
cast into the Firth of Forth than that he should by these lectures 
have given an impetus to infidelity and scepticism. He had got 
encouragement even within the university, for some of the pro- 
fessors held views that were neither in harmony with the Confes- 
sion of Faith nor with the position some of the ecclesiastics held. 
A Romish priest had taken up the subject, and had spoken well 
upon it. He gave him honor for what he had done. People were 
saying "Where are the ministers?" and the lecturer said that he 
knew many of the ministers held one thing and preached another. 
Here was one of the most universal slanders ever committed 
against a Christian community. 

Mr. A. T. Donald seconded the motion. He believed, he 
said, that these lectures had done irreparable evil to the artisans 
of the community. He met the views enunciated every day in his 
congregation and parish, and he believed the sooner the Presbytery 
gave their voice on the subject the better. It had been left too 
long. He was very proud indeed that Dr. Munro, the Roman 
Catholic clergyman, had the boldness to deliver the sermons he 
did. He believed those sermons touched the very foundation on 
which the lecturer built up his arguments. 

Dr, Watt submitted the following amendment ; 

' ' That the Presbytery express profound regret that teach- 
" ing of an unsettling character should be given apparently under 
"the sanction of the Senatus of the university, but deem it inex- 
" pedient to take any action in the matter." 

The reason why he proposed this motion, he said, was that he 
had received the following note from Professor Dickson, whose 
absence he regretted : 

"Dear Dr. Watt, — I see that the subject of the Gifford lec- 
"ture occurs in the business of the Presbytery tomorrow, I 
"had hoped to be present for the purpose of making a short 
"statement for the information of the Presbytery as to the facts. 
"But as I am disabled for the moment by a slight accident, I 
"shall be glad if you will take the opportunity of submitting the 
"enclosed note on the terms of Lord Gifford's will, which I drew 
" up some time ago and put into the hands of Prof. Max Miiller." 
That Document, Dr. AVatt continued, bore date January, 1891, 
and was as follows : 

"Considerable controversy having arisen in the newspapers 

■ over certain statements in the first two Gifford lectures of this 
' session as to ' Physical Miracles ' and the belief of the clergy in 
' regard to them, and calls having been made for a definition of 
' what is meant by the lecturer in his use of that expression, it 
' seems expedient to recall the express words in which Lord Gif- 
' ford has embodied his wishes as to the treatment of the subject. 
' In the deed, as prefixed to Professor Max Miiller's ' Natural Re- 
' ligion ' Lord Gifford, under what he calls leading principles, 
'says — ' I wish the Ircturers to treat the subject as a strictly rat 

' ural science . . . without reference to, or reliance upon, any sup- 
' posed special or so-called miraculous revelation.' The latter 
' clause, which is the only restriction suggested by the testator, is 
' couched in a peculiar form, for which it may be presumed that 
' there was some special reason on the part of a Scotch lawyer or 
'judge -accustomed to weigh his words. Lord Gifford was well 
' aware that provision was already made in the universities — to 
' which he offered his gift — for the teaching of theology as based 

■ on revelation ; and, if he may be credited with judgment, good 
' taste, and common sense, it seems hardly open to doubt that in 
'desiring that the lecturers should avoid ' reference to ' as well as 
' 'reliarce upon' any miraculous revelation, he wished to keep 
' the handling of the subject as far as possible aloof from the risk 
' of coming into collision with already existing provisions. But 
' for this limitation there would have been obvious difficulties in 
' the way of the universities accepting the trust. Whatever may 
' have been his aim, his language as distinctly excludes reference 
' to miracles as it includes reliance on them ; and the one thing 
' of the nature of a restraint imposed on the lecturers is this ex- 
' plicit intimation of the testator's wish, so far as that may under 
' the circumstances be expected to have weight with them. If 
' this view should be acted on there would be little risk of bring- 
' ing one part of the teaching in the university into collision with 
' another, or of having those who have been concerned in the ap- 
' pointment of the lecturer, and who are of very various views, 
' subjected to the imputation of responsibility for statements of 
' opinion which, whatever may be their value, are essentially, 

' under the circumstances, a hors i/'aiivrf." 



So far, Dr. Watt continued, he had discharged his duty to Dr. 
Dickson, and he should not weary the Court by anything he had 
to say. He believed he would follow the line of argument Dr. 
Dickson would have taken had he been present, though for what 
he said he himself was responsible. Although he felt in a some- 
what curious position, he desired to offer something in the nature 
of an apology for the Senatus in the peculiarly difficult circum- 
stances in which they were placed. He believed it would be found 
that there were many members of the Senate who were as deeply 
concerned and grieved at the turn that had been taken by Prof. 
Max Miiller's expressions as any member of the Presbytery. But 
their position was such that they did not see how they could vin- 
dicate themselves in any way that would be satisfactory to them- 
selves, and to the public generally. There were certain consider- 
ations that could be urged in the way of defence, if defence was 
needed, of the appointment of Prof. Max Miiller as Gifford lec- 
turer. The first thing that had to be taken into account was that 
whether the Senatus had taken the trust or not it was certain that 
a lectureship of the kind contemplated by Lord Gifford would 
have been instituted, because there was an alternative body, the 
Faculty of Physicians, who would have had to take charge of the 
trust, and he doubted whether the public would have been better 
served by lecturers appointed by them than they would be by the 
Senatus of the university Then, when they considered that no 
conditions could be imposed upon the lecturer, they could easily 
see that in regard to the first appointment, at least, the most well 
meaning men might have been led into a position which they re- 
gretted. It was impossible that any fault could have been found 
with the first appointment. Prof. Max Miiller was a man of very 
great eminence not only in philology, but also in all branches of 
modern human learning ; and surely if fault could have been found 
with the appoinlment voice- would have been given to it long be- 
fore the Professor began his lectures. He could easily see that, 
had Professor Dickson been present, he could have founded an 
argument of very considerable weight upon the paoer he (Dr. 
Watt) had just read. He could have siid that Prof. Max Miiller 
had a sphere of his own, while the professors of theology had their 
sphere, and that it was not to be expected that he would have dealt 
with such subjects as revelation and miracle, which belonged pro- 
perly to another recognised part of the universiiy. He (Dr. Watt) 
had no hesitation in saying that regret must be widely felt among 
the members of the Senate that the lecturer in one department 
should have used words which seemed to cast discredit upon the 
teaching of the university in another department. This must be 
felt all the more from the consideration that these lectures were 
intended primarily for students, and, he believed, attended largely 
by siudents and If dies. Regret must be felt that students at an 
immature period cf life attended these lectures, and as responsi- 
bility attached to the whole body of the Senate as the teaching 
power, he thought that was something they as a Presbytery might 
regret. The one difficulty in the matter was that Prof. Max Miiller 
should have been appointed for a second time — (hear, hear) — but 
there was something to be said even for that. The main argument 
employed was this It was said that this was a man of eminence 
who came to give a course of lectures, and that that course was 
not finished. It was open to them, and no doubt that they hoped, 
notwithstanding the somewhat dubious utterances he had made, 
that by-and-by in the course that was to come afterwards he would 
put them right. As this motion assumed, many members of the 
Senate, if not the Senate as a whole, felt regret at the unfortunate 
turn things had taken ; but it was certain that if they had shut off 
Prof. Max Miiller's words, and said, " We will not reappoint you," 
and if the reason for doing so had been stated, the outcry against 
them, on the plea that they were repressing freedom of thought, 
would have been quite as strong as the outcry for giving too much 

Dr. John McLeod, in seconding the amendment, said he 
would have preferred if the first part had been expressed in some- 
what stronger terms. He was also to some extent in sympathy 
with that part of Mr. Thompson's motion which would lead more 
clearly to the discovery of the relations between the Presbytery 
and the Senate, or such portions of the Senate as dealt with theo- 
logical matters. Meantime, as a matter of form, he seconded the 

Dr. F. L. Robertson said the position he took was that the 
Presbytery had no jurisdiction over the Senatus of the university. 
They had no doubt authority over certain individual members 
of the Senatus, but over the Senatus as a body they had no juris- 
diction whatever, and they ought not to set themselves up as 
judges of a Court which was quite independent of them. If the 
members of the Senate were so anxious to apologise to the public 
or to any other person, it was for the Senatus to make these apol- 
ogies or take whatever action they pleased. Had the proposals 
of Mr. Thompson and Dr. Watt been restricted to this, and in 
view of the utterances which were alleged to have been made at 
the university, the Presbytery should take the matter into their 
consideration, that would have been an appropriate motion. But 
to ask the Court to take action which would imply that they as- 
sumed jurisdiction over the Senatus of the university was what 
he for one was not prepared to do. The amendment he would 
propose was as follows ; 

" The Presbytery being advised that the Gifford Lectureship, 
at present held by Prof. Max Miiller, was founded by Lord Gif- 
ford in order that the origin of religion might be discussed on a 
scientific basis, declare that it is out of their province to ex- 
press an opinion on the wisdom of the founder in constituting 
the trust, on the expediency of the university in accepting the 
trust, and on the manner in which they have administered the 

' Mr. Niven, in seconding, said he hoped that the expression of 
the opinion that had been called forth would be a sufficient indica- 
tion of the desire of the Presbytery to conserve the interests of re- 
ligious truth, while at the same time they refrained from intrud- 
ing into affairs where they had no legitimate or legal right to appear. 

Mr. Thomson having replied, it was suggested by the Clerk 
that the vote should be taken pcT capita. 

Mr. Thompson — I move that the roll be called, that we may 
see who is for and who is against Christ. 

Dr. F. L. Robertson — I rise to order, and ask that Mr. 
Thompson should withdraw that expression. (Hear, hear.) 

The Moderator asked Mr. Thompson to withdraw the expres- 
sion, but he declined. 

Dr. Robertsoo — I insist on it being withdrawn. Neither Mr. 
Thompson nor any member of the Court has any right to affirm 
that any man who moves an amendment, or who is prepared to 
support it, denies Christ. , 

Mr. Thomson — I say those who prefer the motion are, in 
my opinion, for Christ. It is an expression of opinion. 

The Moderator — Will you authorise me to ask Mr. Thompson 
to withdraw that expression in regard to any member of the Court ? 

Mr. Thomson — I say those who prefer the motion 

The Moderator — You do not gain anything by the course you 
are adopting 

Mr. Thomson — I say I look upon it in the light I have stated. 

The Moderator — Is that a modification ? 

Dr. Robertson — It is not. I move that he be requested to 
withdraw the expression. 

Mr. Thomson — In case it should influence any of your votes 
I withdraw. I have sharp eyes, and I can see who are for and 
who are against. In case somebody should tell me he changed 
because I held to what I said, I withdraw. " I should not do it 



The Moderator — Do you withdraw ? 

Mr. Thomson — Yes, of course. 

The two amendments were then put to the meeting, when 
thirteen voted for Dr. Robertson's and seven for that of Dr. Watt. 
In the second vote Dr. Robertson's amendment was put against 
the motion, and carried by seventeen to five votes. On the result 
the division being announced, 

Mr. Thomson exclaimed — Five for Christ ! 

The Moderator — I do not think that is in order. I do not 
think Mr. Thomson has a right to say of any member that he is 
not for Christ. 

Mr. Thomson — I said they were for Christ. I did not say 
they were not for Christ. 

The Moderator — The implication was rather strong. 

Mr. Nivan — I am sorry that Mr. Thomson has recurred to 
this matter again. I feel that it is inconsistent with the character 
of a Church Court that observations like that should be allowed to 
pass unnoticed. I think that Mr. Thomson should be again called 
upon to withdraw the observation that he has made. 

Mr. Thomson — I said five are for Christ, but I might have 
said more — that they are for the Church of Scotland. 

The Moderator — You have heard again that you are requested 
to withdraw your insinuation against members of this Court. 

Mr. Thomson — I do riot withdraw. I made no insinuation. 

The Moderator. — Do you state explicitly that there is no insin- 
nation ? 

Mr. Thomson — I said decidedly that five are for Christ You 
can ask me to explain. 

Dr. Watt — Mr. Thomson ought clearly to understand that the 
Presbytery, having taken' this view that he should be requested to 
withdraw, may adopt a certain course of conduct. If Mr. Thom- 
son refuses we must punish him in some way. 

Mr.' Thomson — You will be punished for your heresies 

Dr. Watt— The forms and laws of the Church do not provide 
us with any method of punishment, because those who laid down 
the rules of procedure could never for a moment have supposed 
that such words ard expressions, contrary to good feeling, could 
ever be spoken or allowed in any Church Court. I say this, be- 
cause as your Moderator I felt myself in a difficulty if I should be 
pushed into this corner. I feel extremely for you, sir, on this the 
first day on which you have taken the chair, that you should be 
placed in this most unfortunate position. I should like Mr. Thom- 
son to know that we can at least pass a resolution in which we ex- 
press our sense of grievous displeasure and our censure. If a man 
does not feel that, I do not know what he can feel. That would 
be his punishment. I am not making a motion, but letting Mr. 
Thomson know that that is the only alternative before the Presby- 

Dr. John Macleod — In the observations I made with reference 
to Dr. Watt's motion I was at pains to say thnt I sympathised to 
a very large extent with the motives which animated Mr. Thomson 
in so far as they led him to challenge the teaching which has been 
lately delivered in the university. I refrained from comniitting 
myself to his motion, however, because I felt it went prematurely 
into a matter with which it was not expedient for the Court to 
deal. In these circumstances I am entitled more than anyone to 
ask that he should withdraw the expression. Mr. Thomson must 
be certain that many of us who have not seen it to be our duty to 
support his motion are as profoundly indignant at any teaching 
that wouild tamper with the great verities of the Christian faith as 
he can be. If it could be supposed for a single moment that the 
Senate of the university or any part of it were in sympathy with 
such teaching, I should be the first to take action and to propose 
t hat the Church sever its connection with the university altogether, 
so deeply do I feel on the subject. I hope, therefore, that Mr. 
Thomson will see it to be his duty to withdraw the expression and 

not put us in the position of being sympathisers with the teaching 
he has condemned. 

The Moderator — I think after that appeal you should with- 

Mr. Thomson — That relieves me a great deal. I said that 
five are for Christ and the Church of Scotland. I hold that we 
are all that. I do not mean to particularise and say who is not 
for Christ. 

The amendment was then adopted. 

The meeting afterwards separated. 


At the last banquet of the Sunset Club, one hundred and 
ninety-one members were present, and the subject for considera- 
tion was "Our jury system, can it be improved ?" In addition to 
the two leading speakers, fifteen others took part in the debate, 
and they were nearly all alike in opinion that "Our Jury System " 
is a very bad one, and that it ought to be improVed. They were 
not harmoni-ous in their plans for improving it, because many of 
them seemed to have only a superficial knowledge of the genius 
and moral constitution of Trial by Jury, and its importance as a 
sanctuary for liberty when personal rights are assailed by the con- 
spiracies of government. They saw Trial by Jury corrupted in 
the interest of wrong, and they charged upon the system itself the 
very adulterations which it has always resisted until defeated by 
force or fraud. 

The banquet being ended, and the requisite aroma given to 
the subject by the incense of cigars, the chairman called upon Mr. 
Sigmund Zeisler to open the debate. He did it very well, but un- 
fortunately, at the very beginning of his argument, he led the 
company astray by criticising, not the jury system, but those very 
sensible persons who manage to keep out of the jury box. His 
budget of reforms went up in smoke when he said that "no 
amount of legislation will radically improve our jury system so 
long as citizens shirk jury duty." This admission blocked the 
road, because it is morally certain that until the jury system as 
operated in Chicago is reformed, citizens whose time is worth any- 
thing will continue to "shirk" jury service. That service is no 
longer a public duty ; it has become a persecution which it is our 
domestic duty to escape from if we can. Mr. Zeisler himself com- 
plained that at one trial in Chicago, seven weeks were consumed 
in the selection of a jury ; and of course the jurors chosen early 
were compelled to wait week after week for the others. After 
that, several weeks more were consumed in the trial, which con- 
sisted of ten parts testimony and ninety parts objections to its in- 
troduction. A man's duty to his family commands him to avoid 
serving as a juryman at such a trial. 

Most men will agree with Mr. Zeisler that the number of 
"challenges for cause" ought to be reduced, and especially those 
founded on opinions formed or expressed. It is a dismal thing to 
see a lawyer of great mental incapacity fishing in the dried up 
river bed of a man's past lifetime, with a hook baited with frivol- 
ous questions, hoping to get a nibble to which he may call the at- 
tention of the judge as a sign which when corroborated by twenty 
other signs which he expects to get may justify a "challenge for 
cause." It is not so certain, however, that the business of exam- 
ining jurymen as to their qualifications should as Mr. Zeisler 
claims, " be taken from counsel, and given to the presiding judge." 
There are grave objections to that plan. 

It would be travelling backwards to deprive a prisoner or his 
counsel of the right to ask a witness or a juryman any question 
that may be properly put. Eye to eye, and voice to ear, emphasise 
every question, and they help the test of cross examination. It is 
the right of every man to use their potent influence to aid him in 
revealing truth or exposing falsehood. Nor ought it to be the law 
that only second hand questions be put to a juryman concerning 



his qualifications, roundabout from the counsel to the judge, and 
then from the judge to the juryman. This is the practice at courts 
martial, and it is of doubtful wisdom there. A prisoner is often 
at a disadvantage because he is not permitted to examine or cross- 
examine a witness, but must filter all his questions through the 
Judge Advocate. A similar practice would be a novelty in our 
courts, but hardly a reform. 

He did not mean to do it perhaps, but Mr. Zeisler stuck some 
red hot pins into the consciences of his congregation when he de- 
nounced the practice of summoning talesmen by special venire as 
" vicious in itself and a powerful aid to those who practice the art 
of jury packing"; for he knew that a jury packed in that "vi- 
cious " manner by special orders, had sentenced American citizens 
to death with the approval of nearly all the men he was talking to. 
Is it according to etiquette thus to raise ghosts at a festive board ? 

Mr. Zeisler's chief objections were brought against that prin- 
ciple of trial by jury which requires that the verdict shall be 
unanimous ; and here he made a plausible and business like argu- 
ment in favor of a verdict by a majority of two thirds. He was 
not entirely consistent in his reasons, and the success of his plead- 
ing was largely due to the fact that he left out of it the political 
character of trial by jury, and treated that venerable institution 
as merely a practical method by which issues of fact may be de- 
cided. This indeed is the exterior form of it, but its inner spirit 
is now and always was that not only shall the facts be found, but 
also that twelve impartial men chosen from the body of the county 
shall approve the legal consequences which the judges aver must 
follow. Trial by jury has always held in reserve supreme author- 
ity over the final issue Guilty, or Not guily, and within the heart 
of it as within a citadel the Anglo Saxon race for fifteen hundred 
years has preserved "the higher law." 

Coming down to instances, Mr. Zeisler brought up the Cronin 
case to show how the rule of unanimity almost defeated the law of 
punishment. Had the one dissenting juror in that case held out 
for an acquittal instead of a compromise, it would have necessitated 
a new trial ; and that, said Mr. Zeisler, "would have meant the 
eventual escape from all punishment of the perpetrators of a bru- 
tal murder." In this warning and complaint Mr. Zeisler was in- 
consistent with himself, because a little farther on he said that "in 
capital cases the death penalty should not be inflicted unless the 
jury should unanimously agree upon a verdict of guilty." Why 
not ? If they're/' of guilt can be legally established by two thirds 
of a jury why should not the vindication follow ? By this conces- 
sion to the principle of unanimity Mr. Zeisler weakened his case 
and strengthened the other side, because if a verdict by less than 
twelve ought not to carry with it the death penalty, it must be for 
the reason that the verdict itself is doubtful as a finding of the 
fact. And a verdict which is to doubtful to hang a man ought not 
to be sufficiently true to imprison him for life. 

General Stiles, the appointed leader of the other side, brought 
his battalions on to the field in good order, but they came to rein- 
force the arguments of Mr. Zeisler, and gave him victory. Gen- 
eral Stiles agreed with him throughout, and even went beyond 
him, for he said: "It is an important question whether at the 
proper time we could not afford to dispense with the jury system 
altogether. There are a great many objections to it " He was 
not prepared, however, to advocate the immediate abolition of the 
jury system. " We must grow up to that," he said. " Like many 
other things, that is a condition that must be evolved, not created." 
The practical objection to this argument is that it will apply to 
any change proposed by anybody ; "at some future stage in the 
progress of social and political evolution, " says the reformer, ' ' the 
change may be safely made, but — but — but, not now." 

The general discussion that followed lacked originality, and 
the men who took part in it seemed like a lot of stragglers in the 
rear of the column trying to keep up with the main body com- 

manded by Mr. Zeisler and General Stiles. They kept on firing 
at the malingerers who hide when the detail comes for them to 
serve upon the jury ; and one enthusiastic veteran proposed to 
expel from the Sunset club all shirkers of jury duty. The propo- 
sition was not entertained, because if adopted it would have been 
fatal to the club. That same enthusiast also conjured up the ' 'jury 
briber," and proposed to " take him out and hang him." There is 
always among those after-dinner orators an amiable gentleman pre- 
tending to be a man of sanguinary purpose, who sentences to rhe- 
torical death any trivial delinquent whom his imagination, acting 
as a moral policeman, seizes and brings before him for judgment. 

The jury briber having been marched off to summary execu- 
tion, the debate went on. Some of the members advocated pro- 
fessional jurors, elected for a term of years and paid good salaries. 
Others thought that a jury commission should be appointed with 
power to revise the jury lists, and present the names of men from 
whom the jury should be drawn. One member said : " The root 
of the evil is that litigants and their lawyers are not honest." 
Noticing a good many lawyers present, he thought that he ought 
to modify his accusation, and he did so by offering for the lawyers 
an excuse which rather strengthened the original charge. With 
amusing simplicity he said, "lam not preaching that lawyers 
must be honest, for if they are, Ihcy lose their cast:." 

Nearly all the proposed changes had merit in them, and per- 
haps any of them if adopted would be an improvement on the jury 
system as administered in Chicago and other cities now ; but when 
compared with a trial by a jury of twelve good and lawful men 
impartial in themselves, and impartially drawn by lot from all the 
qualified voters of the county it is not likely that any of them would 
be better than the original system, except perhaps in civil causes 
and in criminal cases below the grade of felony; and it is not at 
all certain that they would be an improvement even there. What 
is needed is the i-LStdnitioii of trial by jury, not its mutilation, nor 
the substitution of some other system for it. 

The moral qualities and the political importance of trial by 
jury were presented for consideration by two members of the club, 
but they came too late upon the field. It was near the end of the 
debate when Mr. Gregory said : "No lawyer who has studied the 
history of his profession can but be moved by the accounts of the 
great battles for freedom which have characterised its growth and 
development, and in which trial by jury has borne so conspicuous 
a part." And it was even later when Mr. Hatch condensing a 
very strong argument into a very few words, said: "The jury 
system is not merely a means for the administration of justice 
between parties, it is a political institution It stands between 
the people and arbitrary government, whether it comes through 
the government itself, or by powerful lords, as in the early history 
of England, or as to- day in the encroachments of powerful trusts 
and corporations. The civil liberties of the people will be safe so 
long as the administration of justice is taken part in by juries 
selected by the county at large." 

If Mr. Hatch and Mr. Gregory had spoken earlier, the de- 
bate would have been forced on to the higher plane of historical 
comparison, and the patriotic services of trial by jury would have 
been considered. Besides discussing the most expedient way of 
getting verdicts, this larger question must have been debated. Has 
individual freedom become so firmly established in this country 
that we do not need any longer the political protection of trial by 
jury ? Considering the enormous wealth of the American Pluto- 
cracy, the Imperial prerogatives claimed and exercised by the 
Legislative and Executive powers in the American republic, and 
the disposition to increase them at the expense of popular liberty, 
it may be well for us to pause before we weaken by one-third the 
old safeguard which curbed the Norman barons and conquered 
the English kings, a jury of twelve impartial men, unanimous in 
their verdict. M. M. Trumbull. 




The Christian Union of May 7th says concerning a discussion 
which of late took place between Professor Briggs and his an- 
tagonist, concerning the "whither" of his unorthodox theology; 
" There is every reason to believe that we are at the beginning of 
one of the most fundamental theological discussions of the cen- 
tury, for the question of the sources and authority of the Bible 
goes to the root of the Christian religion. That this discussion was 
certain to come has long been evident to all those who have been 
familiar with critical work on the Old Testament ; that it ought to 
come has long been the conviction of those who hold that the 
world is entitled to every particle of light, and that to know the 
truth is the only security. The Christian Union deprecates quite 
as strongly as any of those who oppose opening this question the 
waste of time and strength in abstract theological discussion, but 
this discussion involves a very different question than one of forms 
or statements. It can no more be postponed than can the move- 
ment of the human mind searching for truth and compelled to 
modify its conclusions by truth. The Christian Church is bound 
to welcome truth from whatever quarter it comes ; if it believes in 
the truth which it possesses, it will be absolutely fearless ; instead 
of shunning discussion and investigation, it will court the clearest 
and most searching e.xamination of all the foundations of its 
faith. What it holds essentially are a few great historic facts 
which answer to the few great human needs and which solve the 
few great hnman problems. The life of the Church is not bound 
up in any theology or philosophy ; it is not identified with any 
explanation of these facts. The facts belong to the Church 
ecumenical and universal ; the explanations belong to the Church 
provincial. The Church provincial has often been disturbed 
and compelled to modify its positions ; the Church universal, 
holding to the essential facts of Christianity, has never been 
shaken and never will be. There has been no more disastrous 
blunder than the attempt to fight against any form of new truth 
on the part of religious people. The .Church ought never to have 
been arrayed against any form of scientific investigation ; and yet 
it has steadfastly, through the mouths of many of its leading teach- 
ers, fought every inch of ground over which science has passed, 
and been driven, step by step, backward from its positions, only 
to discover at length that it had been holding ground that never 
belonged to it and opposing that which was best for it. For it will 
be seen in the long run that the greatest ally of religion in this 
century has been science, correcting false ideas, cutting off specu- 
lative excrescences, simplifying, broadening, and making still more 
majestic the general conception of the universe. Since this dis- 
cussion was certain to come, it ought to come inside the Church 
and not outside it. The researches of Biblical scholars in the last 
hundred years have created a new province of scholarship ; they 
have collected a vast mass of materials bearing upon many of the 
books of the Old Testament and raising many questions with re- 
gard to their dates and authorship. The material is in the pos- 
session of a host of scholars. What the scholars know the world 
will know, sooner or later, for all the conclusions of scholarship 
are certain, eventually, to become common property. It is simply 
a question, in this case, whether these great subjects shall be dis- 
cussed and these great issues settled by devout, reverential schol- 
ars inside the Chuich, or whether the conclusions shall be reached 
by men without religious feeling or interests, but in possession of 
the fads ; it is a question whether the revision of the attitude of 
the Church on these matters shall be made by its friends or forced 
upon it by its enemies. The issue which has been precipitated by 
the outspoken frankness of Professor Briggs ought to have been 
raised years ago. The Church owes a debt of gratitude to Pro- 
fessor Briggs because he has had the courage to raise this question 
frankly and in all its fullness inside Church lines. He does not 
stand alone ; there are many other Christian teachers and scholars 

who, without agreeing with him in every respect, hold to his gen 
eral view and aie at one with him in believing that the time has 
come for discussion and action. In such a discussion as this there 
are manifold temptations to heat, unfairness, and precipitation. 
All these things are to be deprecated and avoided. Professor 
Briggs has already been widely misrepresented. For his sake, and 
for the sake of all those who are to take part in this discussion, we 
warn our readers in no case to make up their opinion until they 
know that they fully understand the position of the man they are 

This article is a good sign of the times. It proves that the 
harvest is near at hand and that a great reformation is preparing 
itself. Whether this reformation is to take place in the Presby- 
terian Church, of which Professor Briggs is a member, would 
however seem to be doubtful. The General Assembly at Detroit 
last week vetoed his appointment to the chair of Biblical Theology 
in Union Seminary. The grave question of heresy still remains 
to be decided by the New York Presbytery. 


Easy Lessons on the Constitution of the United States. 

By Alfred Bayless. Chicago : W. W. Knowles & Co. 

This is an excellent school book, and it will be of great as- 
sistance to students of the American Constitution. Some big boys 
too who think themselves lawyers might study it with a good 
deal of profit. It is an easy explanation in detail of the several 
Articles and Sections of the Constitution, a subject of study gen- 
erally supposed to be extremely difficult to everybody excepting 
persons "learned in the law." 

Some of the author's comments and explanations refer to 
parts of our political system outside the Constitution, but the 
separation is not clearly made, as for instance in passages like 
this : " The senate committees are appointed by the senate itself, 
but the house committees are appointed by the speaker." This 
immediately follows an explanation of the Sections of the Con- 
stitution which refer to the Speaker of the House and the Presi- 
dent of the Senate, and without some explanation might be mis- 
taken for parts of the Constitution. So also, such a statement as 
this, "Every member of Congress is addressed as Honorable." 
This also might be supposed from the context to be a mandate of 
the Constitution ; but these are trifles of small moment in com- 
parison with the merits of the book. 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All coinu 

should be addressed to 

(Nison Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 



Wm. M. Salter ■ 2827 



M. M. Trumbull 2832 





The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion with Science. 

No. 198. (Vol. V.-16 ) 

CHICAGO. JUNE 11. 1891. 

j Two Dollars per Year, 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



Physical Religion beginning with the belief in 
agents behind the great phenomena of nature, reached 
its highest point when it had led the human mind to a 
belief in one Supreme Agent or God. It was supposed 
that this God could be implored bj' prayers and pleased 
by sacrifices. He was called the father of gods and 
men. Yet even in his highest conception he was no 
more than what Cardinal Newman defined God to be. 
"I mean by the Supreme Being," he wrote, "one who 
is simpl}' self-dependent, and the only being who is 
such. I mean that he created all things out of noth- 
ing, and could destro}' them as easily as he made 
them, and that, in consequence, he is separated from 
them bj' an abyss, and incommunicable in all his at- 
tributes." This abyss, separating God from man, re- 
mains at the end of physical religion. It constitutes 
its inherent weakness ; but this very weakness became, 
in time, a source of strength, for from it sprang a 
yearning for better things. The despairing utterances 
of Job, "Man lieth down and riseth not," and of the 
Psalmist, " The dead cannot praise God, neither any 
that go down into darkness," are but the natural con- 
sequence of that abyss which had been fixed by Phys- 
ical Religion between God and man, between the In- 
finite and the finite. 

The history of religion teaches us that a belief in 
the Divine in Nature does not and cannot yield any 
satisfaction to a desire for a more intimate relation 
with the gods or with God, and to the irrepressible 
yearning for immortality. That satisfaction, so far as 
history allows us to see, came from a different source, 
from what I call Anthropological Religion, or the dis- 
covery of the Divine in man. 

We cannot take the name and concept of a soul in 
man for granted, and proceed at once to the question 
how that soul came to be considered as immortal. We 
have to find out, first of all, how such a thing as a 
soul was ever spoken of and thought of. To us the 
two words, "body and soul," are so familiar that it 
seems almost childish to ask the question how man at 
first came to speak of body and soul. But to have 
framed a name for soul is by no means a small achieve- 
ment, and I have no doubt that it took the labor of 
many generations before it could be accomplished. 

We saw how long it took to frame a name for God. 
We also saw that man could never have framed such 
a name unless Nature had taken him b}' her hand, and 
made him see something beyond what he saw in the 
fire, in the wind, in the sun, and in the sky. The first 
steps were made very easy for him. He spoke of the 
fire that warmed him, of the wind that refreshed him, 
of the sun that gave him light, and of the sky that was 
above all things, and by thus simply speaking of what 
they all did for him, he spoke of agents behind them 
all, and at last of an Agent behind all the agencies of 
Nature. We shall find that the process which led to 
the discovery of the soul, and the framing of names for 
soul, was much the same. There was no conclave of 
sages, who tried to find out whether man had a soul, 
and what should be its name. If we follow the vestiges 
of language, the only true vestiges of all intellectual 
creations, we shall find that here also man began b}' 
naming the simplest and most palpable things, and 
that here, also, by simply dropping what was purely 
external, he found himself by slow degrees in posses- 
sion of names which told him of the existence of a 

It is clear that in the case of the soul, as in the 
case of all other abstract objects, the first name and 
the first concept were necessarily formed from material 
objects. The soul, as we conceive it as an invisible, 
intangible, immaterial object, could never have been 
named, and if it could not be named, could never have 
been conceived. But what could be named and con- 
ceived was the blood or the heart, and, better still, 
the breath, the actual spiritus or spirit that went in 
and out of the mouth and the nostrils. Take whatever 
dictionary you like, and you will find how the words 
for soul, if the}' can be analysed at all, invariably point 
back to a material origin, and invariably disclose the 
process by which they were freed from their material 

It may be asked. What has our belief in a soul to 
do with a belief in God? And, to judge from many 
works on religion, and, more particularlj', on the ori- 
gin of religion, it might seem indeed as if man could 
have a religion, could believe in gods and in one God, 
without believing in his own soul, without having 
even a name or a concept of soul. It is true that no 
creed enjoins a belief in a soul as it enjoins a belief 



in God ; and yet, what is the object, nay, what can be 
the meaning of our saying, "I beheve in God," un- 
less we can say at the same time, "I believe in my 
soul "? 

The belief in a soul, however, exactly like the be- 
lief in Gods, and at last, in one God, can only be 
looked upon as the outcome of a long historical growth. 
It must be studied in the annals of language, in those 
ancient words which, meaning originally something 
quite tangible and visible, came in time to mean some- 
thing semi tangible, something intangible, nay, some- 
thing infinite in man. The soul is to man what God 
is to the universe. 

When we remember what is now a fact doubted 
by no one, that every Avord in every language had 
originally a material meaning, we shall easily under- 
stand why that which at the dissolution of the body 
seemed to have departed, and which we consider the 
most immaterial of all things, should have been called 
at first by the name of something material — namel}', 
the airy breath. This was the first step in human 
psychology. The next step was to use that word 
"breath" not only for the breath which had left the 
body, but likewise for all that formerly existed in the 
body — the feelings, the perceptions, the conceptions, 
and that wonderful network of feelings and thoughts 
which constituted the man, such as he was in life. 
For all this depended on the breath. The third step was 
equally natural, though it soon led into a wilderness 
of imaginations. If the breath, with all that belonged 
to it, had departed, then it must exist somewhere 
after its departure, and that somewhere, though ut- 
terly unknown and unknowable, was soon painted in 
all the colors that love, fear, and hope could supply. 
These three consecutive steps are not mere theory, 
they have left their footprints in language, and even 
in our own language these footprints are not yet alto- 
gether effaced. 

This linguistic process which led to the formation 
of words for the different phases of the intellectual life 
of man is full of interest, and deserves a far more 
careful treatment than it has hitherto received, par- 
ticularly at the hands of the professed psychologist. 
What is quite clear is that all the words of the psy- 
chological terminology, for instance the Homeric ex- 
pressions "Psyche," "Menos," "Thymos," "Phrenes," 
begin as names of material objects and processes, such 
as heart, chest, breath, and commotion, just as the 
names of the gods begin with the storm-wind, the fire, 
the sun, and the sky. At first every one of these 
words was capable of the widest application. But 
very soon there began a process of mutual friction and 
determination, one word being restricted idiomatically 
to the vital breath of the life, shared in common by 
man and beast, other words being assigned to the pas- 

sions, the will, the memory, to knowledge, under- 
standing, and reasoning. 

We have seen that the way which led to the dis- 
covery of a soul was clearly pointed out to man, as 
was the way which led to the discovery of the gods. 
It was the breath which almost visibly left the body 
at the time of death that suggested the name of breath, 
and afterwards the thought of something breathing, 
living, perceiving, willing, remembering, and thinking 
within us. The name came first, the name of mate- 
rial breath. By dropping what seemed material even 
in this airy breath, there remained the concept of 
what we call the soul. 

The belief in the continued existence of the soul 
after death, and in its liability to rewards and punish- 
ments, seem as irresistible to-day as in the days of 
Plato. We cannot say that a belief in rewards and 
punishments is universal. We look for it in vain in 
the Old Testament or in Homer. But when that be- 
lief has once presented itself to the human mind, it 
holds its own against all objections. It is possible, no 
doubt, to object to the purely human distinction be- 
tween rewards and punishments, because, from a 
higher point of view, punishment itself may be called 
a reward. Even eternal punishment, as Charles Kings- 
ley used to say, is but another name for eternal love, 
and the very fire of hell may be taken as a childish 
expression only for the constant purification of the 
soul. All this may be conceded, if only the continu- 
ity of cause and effect between this life and the next 
is preserved. But when we come to the next q ue 
tion, whether the departed, as has been fondly sup- 
posed, are able to feel, not only what concerns them, 
but likewise what concerns their friends on earth, we 
may call this a very natural deduction, a very intelli- 
gible hope, we may even admit that no evidence can 
be brought forward against it, but beyond that we 
cannot go. 

Man, if left to himself, has everywhere arrived at 
the conviction that there is something in man or of 
man besides the material body. This was a lesson 
taught not so much by life as by death. Besides the 
body, besides the heart, besides the blood, there was 
the breath. Man was struck by that, and when the 
breath had left the body at death, he simply stated the 
fact, that the breath or the psyche had departed. All 
the speculations on the true nature of \.\v3X psyche with- 
in, belong to the domain of Psychology. 

A mere study of language would show how general, 
nay, how universal, is the belief in something beside 
the body, in some agent within, or of what in Sanskrit 
is called by a very general name, the antahkarana, 
the agency within. Every kind of internal agency 
was ascribed to that something which showed itself 
not only as simply breathing and living, but as feeling 




and perceiving, soon also as naming, conceiving, and 
reasoning. In our lectures on Anthropological Re- 
ligion we have had chiefly to deal with the specula- 
lations which arose from that psyche, as no longer 
within, but as after death tc'ithoiit the bod}'. Here also 
language began with the name of breath. The breath 
had gone, the /jyr//c had departed. ThaX psyche, how- 
ever, was not conceived as mere breath or air, but as 
retaining most of those activities which had been 
ascribed to it during life, such as feeling, perceiving, 
naming, conceiving, and reasoning. So far I do not 
see what can be brought forward against this primitive 
and universal form of belief. If there was a some- 
thing in man that could receive, perceive, and con- 
ceive, that something, whatever name we call it, was 
gone with death. But no one could think that it had 
been annihilated — niinquam nihil ex aliquo. So long, 
therefore, as the ancient philosophers said no more 
than that this something, called breath or psyche, had 
left the body and had gone somewhere else, I do not 
see what counter-argument could stop them. Even 
during life, the body alone, though it could live by it- 
self, could not be said to see or hear or perceive by 
itself. The eye by itself does not see, it requires some- 
thing else to receive and to perceive, and that some- 
thing, though itself invisible, was as real as the invis- 
ible Infinite and the Divine behind the agents in nature, 
whom we call the gods of the ancient world. It be- 
came in turn the soul, the mind, the agent, the subject, 
till at last it was recognised as the Infinite and the 
Divine in man. 

In our longings for the departed we often think of 
them as young or old, we think of them as man or 
woman, as father or mother, as husband or wife. 
Even nationality and language are supposed to remain, 
and we often hear expressions, "Oh, if the souls a-re 
without all this, without age, without sex, without na- 
tional character, without even their native language, 
what will they be to us?" The answer is, they will 
really be the same to us as they were in this life. Un- 
less we can bring ourselves to believe that a soul has 
a beginning, and that our souls sprang into being at 
the time of our birth, the soul within us must have 
existed before. 

Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting ; 

The soul that rises with us, our life's star, 
Hath had elsewhere its setting, 

And Cometh from afar. 

But however convinced we may be of the soul's 
eternal existence, we shall always remain ignorant as 
to how it existed. And yet we do not murmur or com- 
plain. Our soul on awakening here is not quite a 
stranger to itself and the souls who as our parents, 
our wives and husbands, our children and our friends, 
have greeted us at first as strangers in this life, but 
have become to us as if we had known them for ever. 

and as if we could never lose them again. If it were 
to be so again in the next life, if there also we should 
meet at first as strangers till drawn together by the 
same mysterious love that has drawn us together here, 
why should we murmur or complain ? Thousands of 
years ago we read of a husband telling his wife, " Verily 
a wife is not dear, that you may love the wife ; but 
that you maj' love the soul, therefore a wife is dear." 
What does that mean ? It means that true love con- 
sists, not in loving what is perishable, but in discov- 
ering and loving what is eternal in man or woman. 



It is a question in m}' mind whether the present 
tendenc}' of science is not to exalt be5'ond its proper 
sphere the law of differentiation. Can the most highly 
differentiated or specialised product of nature be 
proved to be, on the whole, the highest product in an}- 
but a relative sense? It seems to me that differentia- 
tion carried too far must end either in stagnation or 
decay. No one will den)' that the differentiation which 
has resulted in a species of animals that can swim and 
live in the water makes them far superior to man in 
this respect, but who will dare to saj' that the}' are, 
on this account, a higher product of nature than man ? 
The same is true of the differentiation which has re- 
sulted in flying. And what is the price which these 
highly differentiated beings have paid for their supe- 
riority in this line ? Simply that they are forever cut 
off from all progress; their individuality is reduced to 
a minimum, they can fly and swim beautifully, but 
they can do precious little else except reproduce their 

When man first came upon the scene, whatever 
may have been the producing forces of a condition 
favorable to his appearance, Nature found herself 
face to face with a new sort of material in the rough, 
in which there were latent immense possibilities for 
intellectual and spiritual development and over which 
she was to wield her differentiating sway. And from 
her task she has never flinched until, to give a few 
examples, we have, here, a dancing, flirting, vain, self- 
ish species of man, and there a toiling, moiling spe- 
cies ; here a race of millionaires, and there, a race of 
paupers ; here we have a genus which can write the 
most learned essays, and yet cannot enjoy the finest 
musical' composition in the world ; there a genus which 
will grow rapturous over a symphony, and call Her- 
bert Spencer "stuff"; here a sex whose standard is 
morality, and there a sex whose standard is immoral- 
ity. Mind protoplasm, so to speak, has been under- 
going the process of differentiation into just so many 
birds and fishes of the mind kingdom. Now, the 
question is, " Is this a course of things which is going 



to bring about the greatest sum of happiness to the 
human race ?" 

It is quite conceivable that if the birds and fishes 
of the animal kingdom had had their choice of being 
supr&me flyers or supreme swimmers, or of foregoing 
this special supremacy for the sake of the greater pos- 
sibilities opened out in becoming members of the hu- 
man race, they would have chosen the latter. Shall 
we for the first time fully aroused and conscious of 
nature's differentiating methods do everything in our 
power to further her designs until we have so many 
species of perfected and isolated specialists that no 
farther general progress will be possible? — unless still 
another sort of un-differentiated, homogeneous being 
should be kind enough to make his appearance and 
give Nature another chance. 

I do not see what good there was in our finding 
out this law of nature if we are only to go on con- 
sciously doing the same thing we have been uncon- 
sciously doing for millions of ages. It would be about 
as sensible to insist that after the discovery of the 
law of gravitation men should have made a point of 
tumbling down as often as possible in order to show 
their appreciation of Nature's beneficent law and aid 
her in carrying it out. The truth is that men are 
slaves to the laws of nature only so long as they re- 
main unconscious of them. As soon as they have 
found them out, the laws of nature become their 
slaves. The destructive lightning is chained and made 
to do the duty which was once done by a farthing 

It is just here that man has such an enormous ad- 
vantage over the lower animals, and if he lets nature 
develop him into fishes and birds, he is ignoring his 
own most distinctive characteristic, and one which 
ought to prevent his blotting out the progress of the 
race by overspecialisation. 

I have been led to make these remarks mainly on 
account of the use which scientists are making of the 
argument of differentiation against woman. For hun- 
dreds of centuries, religion has been made to bear 
witness against her, and, now, just when a new day 
seemed to be dawning, and the pernicious results of 
religious superstition are being thrown off, she is to be 
subjected to a material superstition which bids fair to 
make her fight for independence harder than it has 
ever been ; for science scorning the spiritual sceptres 
of the human past as unbecoming our fuller knowledge 
yet inconsistently bows in abject servitude to the ma- 
terial sceptres of an ante-human past. The scientific 
man is so much taken up with his new found ances- 
tors, the beasts of the field, and he is so delighted with 
the resemblances which he perceives to exist between 
them and himself that he is for modeling his life on 
their plan, and he either ignores, or issues scientific 

Bulls against any tendency he may observe to escape 
what he calls the fundamental laws of nature. 

Nature, having divided the men off from the women, 
it is the duty of the human race, says the scientist, 
to follow her lead and emphasise this dividing as much 
as possible. Now, it is rather a curious fact that, al- 
though they preach the practicability of as much sub- 
differentiation and specialisation — provided the main 
line of differentiation from women is preserved — as 
possible among men, they declare that women must 
remain among themselves a highly differentiated whole 
of men-pleasing, child bearing, house-keeping beings. 

Fortunately, for the women, they possess a con- 
sciousness which the poor birds and fishes of the past 
did not possess, and although they perceive that every 
opportunity is given them to become specialists in 
one line, they prefer the larger possibilities which 
open out to them in considering themselves homo- 
geneous, and capable, like men, of further sub-differ- 

Since, spite of their sex difference, men and women 
do possess many points of likeness, the tendency of 
this sub-differentiation has been to make men and 
women — not more different, but more alike — at least 
intellectually. But intellectuality is tending to spirit- 
ualise woman more and more ; and, no doubt, much 
to the chagrin of the materially superstitious scientist, 
there is being developed a species of woman in which 
the sex instinct is reduced to a minimum, and to whom 
love can come only in the person of a being spiritually 
and intellectually like herself. While a lower kind of 
love may be founded in difference, the higher kind of 
love which alone endures can only be founded in fun- 
damental likeness. 

To illustrate, we may suppose the point in evolu- 
tion reached where the sexes have become completely 
differentiated. Such a point once reached, there are 
but three things which could happen, either men and 
women must grow farther and farther apart, or they 
must continue to occupy the same relative position to- 
wards each other, or they must grow closer together. 
If nature is servilely aided in her differentiating plan, 
she will take men off to one pole and women off to the 
other and there will be no bringing them together on 
any but the lowest sexual plane. The men who "fly" 
will find the women who can hardly even "swim" 
most uninteresting personages and will either prey 
upon them or leave them alone altogether, either of 
which would result in the decay of the race. 

If, on the other hand, nature be supposed to have 
assigned men and women their place permanently at 
the point where their difference is emphasised, rather 
than their likeness, there can be no real friendship nor 
sympathy between them. Men will have either in- 
tellectual or "fast" pursuits, women, domestic or 




frivolous pursuits, and the inevitable result will be 
that they will have little but an ephemeral sexual at- 
traction for each other, their lives will not harmonise 
and the result will be stagnation. 

Should, however, men and women both wisely use 
the laws of differentiation, the result must be that they 
will grow more and more alike intellectually and spirit- 
ually and an increase of sympathy between them will 
be the result. 

If we look about us we are led to the conclusion 
that so far, women alone, and, of course only some of 
them, have been exercising this guiding influence on 
differentiation. Men have either stood still at the 
point where the differentiation became emphasised, 
representing, broadl}' speaking, orthodox superstition, 
or they have enrolled themselves as slaves to nature's 
law and followed the direction which represents scien- 
tific superstition. In either case they are getting far- 
ther away from those women who are developing 
their spiritual as well as their intellectual instincts, 
and who will have nothing to do with men, however 
intelligent, who insist on the supremacy of animal in- 

That what I have said of developing womanhood, 
is true, is proved on every side by the fact that many 
a woman is finding her companion for life in another 
woman, in whose love and sympathy the higher needs 
of her nature are fulfilled, and scientists may talk as 
they will about her duties to the human race, she has 
found out the sacredness of her duty to herself and 
never again-will she be willing to fulfil duties to the 
race, unless they are raised to a plane where they will 
not conflict with her intellectual and moral ideals. 

From the foregoing remarks it will be seen that 
differentiation may be used to bring about likeness 
as well as difference, and having become conscious of 
its laws, it is our duty so to use them as to bring about 
the highest development of the human race. 

There may come a time when the work of the 
specialists will be accomplished ; when the human in- 
tellect will be able to grasp universal knowledge, from 
which alone springs universal sympathy, and with 
that, greater happiness than the specialist ever dreamed 
of in his philosophy ; when the musician shall be in 
sympathy with the scientist, and the scientist shall 
not scoff at the poet. In fact, a suspicion will cross 
my mind at times, that Nature herself is tending to 
produce not a heterogeneous crowd of differentiated 
noodles but beings who will unite, in one glorious 
world-embracing synthesis, the knowledge which her 
slaves the specialists have developed to that stage 
where the new order of beings can seize and ripen it 
in the warmth of all other knowledge. But it rests 
with man to decide whether he shall be that being or 
whether it is to be a species yet unborn. 



The Howard Association for the promotion of the best meth- 
ods of the Treatment and Prevention of Crime and Pauperism 
have issued a leaflet entitled " The collegiate and hotel prisons of 
the United States, iSgi." (Office: 5 Bishopsgate Street, London.) 

We notice this tract at some length because the subject mat- 
ter of it is of great importance ; and because of the philanthropic 
services of John Howard, whose humane example is the inspira- 
tion and vitality of the useful institution which bears his name. 
As the life of John Howard was devoted to the abolition of crimes, 
the mitigation of penalties, and the reformation of criminals, it 
grates a little harshly upon the feelings that an association organ- 
ised to carry on his work, should issue a pamphlet complaining 
that the treatment of criminals in the prisons of the United States 
is not sufficiently painful and severe. The foundation of its argu- 
ment is the following statement : 

"American criminality is so alarmingly increasing, tliat whereas in 1S50, 
every million inhabitants of the United States only contributed ago prisoners, 
the proportion had risen to a^s in 1S70 and as high as i,i6c) in the million in 
iSSo. The census of 1S90 appears to indicate a still further increase of crimi- 
nality; there being 10,000 more 'convicts' than in iSSo." 

These figures are misleading, and they show us with what in- 
genuity statistics may be used to reveal and conceal the truth. In 
that one extract the words "prisoners," "criminality," and "con- 
victs," are synonymously used; whereas, in fact, a "prisoner" 
maybe neither criminal nor convict, a "criminal" neither con- 
vict nor prisoner, and a "convict" may be not a criminal nor in 
prison, for his conviction may be for the violation of some petty 
city ordinance involving no moral turpitude whatever. The 
figures are misleading also because they make no discrimination 
between crimes, mala in se and crimes which are merely ina/a 
proltibita. In one year 7,566 persons were imprisoned in the Chi- 
cago house of correction, and all but igo of them were incarcer- 
ated for non-payment of fines. Yet in the statistics used by the 
Howard Association they all appear as "convicts." 

In compiling those figures no notice is taken of the multipli- 
cation of statutory offenses which is constantly going on in the 
United States. We have about fifty legislatures in this country 
and they spend the winter time in making laws prohibiting and 
making criminal various deeds of commission and omission which 
are perfectly innocent in themselves. The "criminality" de- 
plored by the Howard Association may be obstructing the side- 
walk, killing game for food instead of sport, peddling, pulling a 
tooth without a license, or some such heinous thing. 

The Association complains that "criminals and vagrants in 
America are treated with a leniency which is positively cruel to 
the honest community." By this leniency, remarks that admir- 
able society, "the Americans have sought to reverse the Divine 
ordinance that the law should be a terror to evil-doers." Only a 
hundred years ago, and even down to the reign of George the 
Fourth, platoons of malefactors were hanged every Monday 
morning at Tyburn corner in London, or in front of the Newgate 
prison ; while hundreds of others were transported to the penal 
settlements at Botany Bay ; and yet the law was not a greater 
terror to evil-doers then, than it was after John Howard and his 
disciples had forced the "Divine ordinance" of mercy into the 
sanguinary criminal code of England. 

The Howard Association criticises our habit of pampering 
convicts ; and with good reason, if the following statement is true : 

"Thus some prisons in the United States, such as Elmira and Concord, 
have introduced " the collegiate system," for rendering proficiency in study a 
chief test of the fitness of their inmates for liberation. These and other Amer- 
ican prisons provide their inmates with a sumptuous dietary. Thus at the 
California state prison of Folsom the convicts are not even obliged to work. 
If they choose to remain idle and lounge about in gangs they may do so ; and 
still have every day a meat diet with coffee and vegetables. If they volunteer 



to work at the quarries near the prison they are rewarded with soups, syrups, 
tea and cake and meat suppers. A third grade secures for them chops and 
steaks for breakfast as well as supper, with hot rolls and fruit, and a dinner 
worthy of a good hotel." 

We admit that this is maudlin bene.olence, and that it strains 
the quality of mercy to the breaking point, but we think there is a 
mistake as to the " menu." We half suspect also that the Howard 
Association circulated this tract as a sinister inducement to the crim- 
inal classes of London to emigrate, and thereby save the taxpayers 
of that village the expense of supporting them at Millbank or Pen- 
tonville. What is the use of passing laws to exclude European 
criminals from this country so long as the Howard Association 
persists in telling them that this is the paradise of convicts, where 
they may revel in luxury and idleness, besides receiving when in 
prison all the advantages of a "collegiate " education. Are the 
members of the Howard Association sufficiently aware of the aw- 
ful responsibility they assume when they thus lead their English 
brethren into temptation ? We hope that this leaflet has not been 
translated into foreign languages and circulated on the continent 
of Europe ; but if it has been, we warn the criminal classes there 
not to be led astray by it, for if they come over here and get into 
an American penitentiary expecting to receive hotel fare and a 
collegiate course of education they will be wofully disappointed. 

Some of the criticisms directed specially against the Elmira 
system will apply to the " reformatory " principle in every other 
prison in the world, and they make strong arguments in its favor ; 
as for instance, this : 




ng the seve 

re competitio 

n of hor 

est indi 

stry, i 

t is m 

Dst unfair 

to the 





n that 

these c 


at El 

nira s 

hould be 




and fancy 



as modelling a 

id des 


from na. 

ture, en 



? in brass. 


ng po 

traits i 

1 coppo 

r, telegraph 

■, and so 


Here is an admission that even " convicts " mjy have a genius 
for the higher mechanics and the esthetic arts ; and if teaching 
them is unfair to the ordinary workman it must be because they 
have the ability to learn ; and if when released from prison they 
enter into " competition " with other workmen, it must be because 
they are willing to earn their living by work instead of crime. 
This complaint bears testimony in favor of Elmira. The Howard 
critics appear to recognise that themselves, for they tacitly concede 
the claim that Elmira (/I'tM reform, but they insinuate that this 
very reformation is a bad thing tempting young men to commit 
crime that they may be imprisoned at Elmira and converted into 
useful citizens. On this rather unreasonable view of it they moral- 
ise in a stately, Sir Leicester Deadlock sort of a way, and say, 
"The safety and welfare of the community far outweigh in im- 
portance the interests of the individual," a mouldy sentiment 
which for ages has been urged as an excuse for every injustice 
which the community may thmk proper to inflict upon that un- 
lucky " individual." 

It would be comical irony should the Howard Association be- 
gin a reaction towards that irrational and vindictive system of 
prison discipline which it was the mission of John Howard to 
soften and to civilise. 


A VERY good stroke of business was accomplished last week 
by a party of Turkish brigands not far from Adrianople. They 
wrecked a railway train, and after "holding up" the passengers 
in a way that would have done credit to American experts, they 
invited Herr Israel, the Berlin banker, with three of his friends 
who happened to be on the train, and also the conductor, to par- 
take of their hospitality at their country seat in the mountains. 
The brigands were so delighted with the society of their German 
guests that they sent a message back to town saying that they 
really could not afford to part with them for less than ten thou- 
sand dollars apiece, or forty thousand dollars for the five, the 

conductor being generously thrown into the bargain without any 
extra charge. They also added by way of a postscript that if the 
money was not paid they would cut off the heads of their guests, 
and send them to Berlin for nothing. The matter coming to 
the knowledge of Chancellor Caprivi, he immediately telegraphed 
an order to the German Ambassador at Constantinople to pay the 
money and release the captives. Although the sum demanded for 
the prisoners was far beyond their value, he would not higgle 
about the price, but pay it, and require the Turkish government 
to refund the money. 

The prompt and businesslike action of Chancellor Caprivi, 
in the matter of the Turkish brigands is in admirable contrast to 
the methods pursued by the English authorities in a similar case 
that occurred in Greece. Lord Muncaster and some friends were 
captured by brigands in the neighborhood of Athens, and carried 
off into the mountains where they were held for ransom. There 
was so much chaffering and circumlocution by the English offi- 
cials, who could not do anything without expending the constitu- 
tional quantity of red tape and sealing wax, that the prisoners 
were all the time in jeopardy ; while the Greek government 
mounted its cavalry in hot haste to chase the brigands and release 
the captives The slowness of the English government in the 
right direction, and the haste of the Greek government in the 
wrong direction, sealed the fate of the captives, for the brigands, 
impatient and alarmed, solved the whole problem by putling them 
to death. Perhaps this case furnished the lesson for Caprivi ; but 
whether it did or not, his action will go far towards abolishing 
that international nuisance known as brigandage. When govern- 
ments find that they must pay the damages caused by tolerated 
brigands they will probably suppress them. It will hardly do for 
the Grand Vizier to say to Chancellor Caprivi that owing to the 
peculiar constitution of the Turkish empire, the Turkish govern- 
ment has no criminal jurisdiction in the State of Adrianople. 

In his picturesque and fascinating way Macaulay describes 
the scene inside the palace at Whitehall that Sunday evening when 
King Charles II was mortally struck with apoplexy in the midst 
of a gay and dissolute company. The eloquent historian says ; 
" His palace had seldom presented a gayer or a more scandalous 
appearance than on the evening of Sunday the first of February, 

1685 The great gallery of Whitehall, an admirable relic of 

the magnificence of the Tudors, was crowded with revellers and 

gamblers A party of twenty courtiers was seated at cards 

round a large table on which gold was heaped in mountains." We 
have been accustomed to regard that royal and patrician dissipa- 
tion as the quality of a profligate era which ended long ago, and 
yet, leaving out some of the grosser features which Macaulay 
mentions, the scene at Tranby Croft, where the Prince of Wales 
officiated as banker at a baccarat table, was in its gambling char- 
acter an imitation of Whitehall. A game of cards played by friends 
at a private house for nominal stakes put up merely to emphasise 
the amusement may be harmless enough ; but a game wherein one 
of the players wins five hundred dollars a night, as Sir William 
Gordon Curaming did at Tranby Croft, is covetous gambling, 
whether it be played by baronets, earls, and princes, or by knaves 
and sharpers of the baser sort. Luxury and idleness must have 
excitement, and gambling is one of the stimulants they crave. The 
man who has fallen low enough to win another man's money 
fairly, will soon descend low enough to win it unfairly if he can. 
And they say there was cheating at Tranby Croft, by a chivalrous 
knight, in a game where the bank was kept and the cards were 
dealt by the heir to the English throne, 

It was rather a pleasant thing for the British democracy to 
see the Prince of Wales in the witness box confessing himself a 



baccarat banker and a gambler ; because his presence there in that 
capacity rubbed a little more veneering off that venerable super- 
stition which is known as monarchy. Whatever brings that ancient 
institution into contempt is regarded as a gain to political civilisa- 
tion ; and the sordid pastimes of the prince tarnish the crown 
which the exemplary life of his mother made radiant. This bac- 
carat scandal as they call it shortens the reign of royalty and caste 
in England. It shows to the English people of what common clay 
their titled aristocracy is made. It will do greater service than 
that, for it will lower the fence that divides cheating from gaming, 
and hasten the time when they will be compelled to graze in the 
same pasture. The difference between winning money fairly and 
winning it by cheating is only of degree. Neither is honest, but 
one is a little more dishonest than the other. The fashionable 
world of London affects to be greatly shocked that there should be 
cheating at cards by one of the Prince's own set, a baronet and 
lieutenant colonel of the guards, and the Prince himself in the 
witness box dolefully referred to the thimble-rig performance at 
Tranby Croft as " a sad event" ; not the gambling, nor even the 
cheating, but the detection and exposure of the cheat. The Prince 
is a grandfather now, and old enough to know that every winning 
of money by gambling, no matter how " square " the game, is " a 
sad event." No man can honestly win, and take, and keep five 
hundred dollars of another man's money, no matter how fair may 
be his play according to the gambler's code. 

M. M. Trumbull. 



To Ihe Editor of The Open Court : 

If I misrepresented your view by stating that when a man 
acts without any obstacle in his environment he is not under law, 
it was because you claim that at such a time a man is free ; hence 
you palter with monism in a double sense. What the thinkers of 
this age are striving for is clearness of thought and logical expres- 
sion. We have had confusion enough and bi.tter strife enough. 
What we want now is, that which will tend to harmonise with 
reason and bring " peace on earth and good will among men," but 
I don't see how these can obtain from your definition of monism. 
Because to say that you "accept determinism wholly and fully, 
but from the same standpoint of monism freewill must also be 
accepted," you make confusion instead of peace. You can, as an 
individual, accept that contradiction, but you cannot truthfully 
teach that doctrine for scientific truth ; for it is equivalent to say- 
ing that two and two are four, but you must accept the doctrine 
also, for certain reasons, that two and three are four. What we 
want is clearness here. True monism does accept Determinism 
wholly and fully ; it must, there is no alternative, but semi-re- 
ligious monism need not. As Professor Huxley says, we must call 
a spade a spade. 

I can distinguish between your position and the pagan doctrine 
of the freedom of the will and God's sovereignty, but your position 
is equally at varience with reason. If you postulate the freedom 
of the will because, in your opinion, it is best adapted to teach 
morals, I grant you the right, but you must remember that upon 
your own confession of determinism you assume an error that 
good may come. Artificial morality may largely depend upon 
teaching that untruth, but real morality, never ! 

The doctrine of scientific monism is not adapted to those who 
need moral instruction ; it is for those who are moral. Under the 
necessity of adaptation to condition, nature had to start with the 
delusion of freewill. But we are now beginning to see face to 
face and that delusion must go along with the doctrine of the re- 
surrection of the body. 

I agree with you that " man's actions are always according to 
law, but I insist that his actions are caused by law — cause — and 
therefore are not free. There is this difference between us : You 
postulate freewill (after you have declared by determinism that 
no such thing exists) for the sake of morality, while I deny it for 
the sake of scientific monism, truth and consistency. 

To say that nature is a slave to law, or cause is not stating a 
dualism of cause and reality, because cause is reality. When I 
say that nature cannot exist and can exist at the same time, I de- 
clare a reality and at the same time show that nature cannot do both . 
The causes which govern forms are a part of nature, so when I 
say that a man is caused to eat by reason of hunger, I state a real- 
ity, not a dualism of cause and reality. I agree again, that " the 
power that produced man is in him and that he is a part of it," 
but I insist that he is a subordinate part through and through, that 
comes and goes by that which is not himself. When he is, nature 
is one, and when he is not, nature is still one. With organisation 
comes will, same as sight and hearing — nature's adaptation to ends. 
The eye must see, the ear must hear, and the will must sense ac- 
tion ; all these are affected by causes. The eye cannot see an ob- 
ject if it is not there ; the ear cannot hear a sound if there is none 
and the will cannot will unless there is something to repel or at- 
tract it. A man's actions are not the results of himself alone ; 
they are results of combinations of which he is always a factor, 
but he is never the prime factor ; that honor belongs to nature, 
and true monism must give it that honor, for all things proceed 
from one. 

There is no dualism here. The stalk is a necessary factor for 
the production of corn, but it is not the prime factor because na- 
ture evolves both stalk and corn. If nature could evolve corn 
without a stalk it would not be governed by that law. Prof. Joseph 
Le Conte is mistaken when he says " in organic evolution nature 
operates . . . without the co-operation of the thing evolving," be- 
cause the stalk is as essential for corn as good men and women 
are for the formation of a good environment. 

Now instead of postulating an untruth for the purpose of 
morality, in order to cause mankind to feel their responsibility, 
would it not suit monism better to declare the undeniable truth 
which harmonises with determinism, that man in his relation to 
results is always a factor in the combination and therefore must be 
held responsible ? Nature does not hold mankind responsible be- 
cause they are free, but because, in the nature of things, it must. 

John Maddock. 


Clearness of thought can be attained only by giving plain 
and unmistakable definitions. I have defined the term freewill as 
I use it, repeatedly ; and it is not my fault if Mr. Maddock again 
and again speaks of a freewill as a will which is not determined by 
law. Everything is determined by law and also all the actions of 
man are strictly and unequivocably determined by law. Not only 
the actions, but also all the wishes, desires, and tendencies to act, 
every and even the slightest commotion in our mind, every thought, 
every hope and fear, they all arise according to strict and unalter- 
able laws. Will is a tendency to act. If this tendency to act can 
freely pass into act, I call the will free. If for some reason it is 
prevented from passing into act, I observe that the will is under 
constraint, it is not free. These are my definitions, and anyone 
criticising my position has to bear m mind what I mean by " free.'' 

Mr. Maddock's definition of " free " seems to be " that which 
is not determined by law," and of course if free means "not de- 
termined by law," there is no freedom. But then the word "free " 
would be a useless word and we should drop it entirely ; but we 
should have to invent a new word for that which I understand by 
free. It is apparent that there is a great difference between an 
act which is performed without constraint and another act which 



is performed by some compulsion. If a man works because a 
slave-driver stands behind him with a whip, his work is no moral 
act ; but if he works without any such compulsion simply because 
he wills it, if he works from what I call " freewill " and what Mr. 
Maddock calls "he must " because the law of nature forces him 
to do, his act is the true expression of his will. The acts of what 
I call " freewill" are necessary acts ; they are determined by law, 
But being free, they show what kind of a will is in the man ; and 
we can accordingly judge of the character of a man only if we con- 
sider the acts which he performed when he was under no con- 
straint, when he was free. The acts of a slave do not show his 
real character. All our ethical education aims at liberation. We 
educate our children to make them free. AVe teach them the na- 
ture of the moral law and as soon as they possess motive impulses 
in their mind to remain in harmony with the moral law, we need 
no longer put any restraint upon them, we need no more watch 
them, but can leave them to themselves, or in other words, we can 
give them their freedom. 

Now Mr. Maddock might ask me why I use the word freedom 
for a state which according to his usage of terms is slavery. He 
imagines that I do it, because " it is best adapted to teach morals." 
That is not my motive. My motive is that I trust it is the truest 
expression of things as they actually are. Man's actions are not 
" caused by laws " as Mr. Maddock says; man is not " a slave " 
of laws. Man's actions are caused by "causes"; ^nd causes 
which affect a man's will are called motives. If a hungry man 
finds bread, he will if he is without constraint naturally and neces- 
sarily eat it. Hunger is the main motive of his act of eating and 
this hunger is at the time a part of himself Hunger means a want 
of food, and a want of food implies the desire to eat. The desire 
to eat is at the time his will. If this will is not restrained (if it is 
free), it will pass into act. Would it be proper to say that this 
will is the slave of his desire to eat ? This will is the man's desire 
to eat. Accordingly there is no sense in saying that it is the slave 
of itself. 

But Mr. Maddock says, man is the slave of laws and he also 
says that nature is the slave of laws. To say that man's will is 
the slave of his motives is a meaningless tautology, for every free 
man may be called his own slave. But to say that man is the 
slave of laws (viz. the psychological laws of action) and that na- 
ture is the slave of natural laws, is a palpable dualism. Natural 
laws are only formulas describing the uniformities of nature. 
Hungry men desire to eat is a statement of fact, or rather of 
many facts which belong together. If I call this statement a law 
I must not think of it as some legal authority which is outside of 
the stomachs of hungry men compelling them to have a desire for 
food. The actual facts are the hungry men and all hungry 
men desire to eat. This uniformity is formulated in a general 
statement, and the general statement is called a natural law. It 
is positively erroneous and shows a trace of dualism to consider 
the law of gravitation as the power that forces the stone to fall. 
Gravity makes the stone fall, and gravity is a certain quality of 
the stone, it is (so far as the fall is concerned) the stone itself. 
The stone certainly falls according to a certain law, its fall is de- 
termined by law or in other words there is a uniformity in all falls 
of stones which can be described in a definite formula But there 
is no sense in saying that the stones, when falling, are slaves of 
that formula. Nor is there any reason to speak of men whose 
freedom of action is not curtailed as slaves of the psychological 
laws by which the uniformities of human action are described-^ 

If I have taken up this subject again and again, it is because 
I believe with Mr. Maddock that we must strive for clearness of 
thought, and I respect Mr. Maddock's pertinacity although I re- 
gret that he does not understand what I mean by free will. 

p. c. 


T/ie Ci-iiliiry for June contains an illustrated article "Women 
at an English University," (Newham College, Cambridge) 'by 
Eleanor Field. 

Niilio)!iil ZcitKug is the name of a new German publication 
which makes its weekly appearance in Chicago. It is most ably 
edited by Joseph Brucker and discusses the live, political, eco- 
nomical, religious, and literary questions of the day. The first 
five numbers which w.e have seen are very promising and we do 
not doubt that the success of the journal is ensured. 

Professor Max Miiller tells us in his article "The Discovery 
of the Soul," how man came to believe in a soul. He explains to us 
the historical growth of the soul-idea which was taught us mainly 
by death. Death proved that besides the natural body there must 
be something else in man, his life, his soul, something spiritual 
which leaves the body with the last breath. This something was 
conceived as an agent within and was accordingly called in Sans- 
crit antaJiknrana (the agency within). This conception of the 
soul as the agency within has been of great service in the evolu- 
tion of our psychological ideas, but it has also been a source of 
many errors. Even to-day it is not uncommon to represent the 
soul as a certain something which is a distinct entity moving about 
in the body. This soul-entity is either supposed to consist of a 
special ethereal substance or (according to Herbart and his school) 
it is said to be an immaterial point, an atom forming a centre of 
energy and causing all the phenomena of soul life by interaction 
with the material brain-cells. Prof. Max Miiller is no dualist, but 
most representatives of the idea that the soul is an agency within, 
are dualists. The errors that so naturally originate from the idea 
that the soul is an agency within the body, have led to an aban- 
donment of the term and gave way to what may briefly be called 
the psychology of positivism. We have stated our view of the 
subject at length in a series of former articles and in "The Soul 
of Man," and need not go into further details here. 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

t:e3:ei o^'eit coxji^t, 

(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 



Mueller 2835 


Cl.\rke 2S37 


gen. M, M. TRtJMBOLL 2839 

CURRENT TOPICS. Brigandage and Ransom. Gaming 

and Cheating. Gen. M. M. 'Trumbull 2840 


Law Permits no Freedom of Will. John Maddock. . . . 

Are we the Slaves of Law ? Editor 2841 

NOTES 2842 

itvv BERRY 


The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion ^vith Science. 

No. 199. (Vol. v.— 17.) 

CHICAGO, JUNE 18, 1891. 

1 Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



I OFTEX divide my friends into two classes : those 
with bright eyes and those with dark eyes. Those 
with bright eyes, whatever they look" at, whether na- 
ture or man, whether the past or the present, see only 
what is bright and beautiful and good. Those with 
dark eyes, wherever they look, see only what is dark 
and gloomy and bad. I am sorry for my dark-eyed 
friends. They are often verj' excellent people — very 
honest, very conscientious ; but, with all that, they 
can be very unjust. Their ideals are pitched too high 
for this world. Show them a brilliant jewel, and they 
will at once look for a flaw in it. Give them a fragrant 
rose, and they will complain of its thorns. Describe 
to them an ancient religion, full of noble aspirations, 
and they will at once discover something that seems 
to them strange, absurd, and wrong, while what is 
good and true in it entirely'escapes their notice. 

My bright eyed-friends are, I believe, the better 
judges. They know how to appreciate even what is 
not quite perfect, if only it is well meant. And, after 
all, true criticism does not consist in merely finding 
out faults : it has a higher, though it may be a more 
difficult, task to perform — nam el}', to find out what 
is good, or what was as least meant to be good. 

But besides my bright-eyed and my dark eyed 
friends, there is a third class — a most mischievous, 
though, I am afraid, a very numerous class. They 
see nothing but what is bright in all that is their own, 
and nothing but what is dark in all that is not their 
own. This produces a most disagreeable squint, and 
makes a straightforward view of things and an}- honest 
judgment almost impossible. 

Now, I cannot help thinking, and saying that most 
of the judgments we meet with of foreign religions 
come from these squinting critics, who with one eye 
see nothing but what is good and true in their own 
religion, and with the other nothing but what is bad 
and false in the religions of other nations. We see 
them from the very first dividing all religions into two 
classes — namely, true and false religions, the true be- 
ing their own, the false comprising all the rest. And, 
mind, I do not accuse Christian critics only. This 
squinting treatment of religion is universal, or almost 
universal. The Mohammedan, the Jew, the Buddhist, 

the Brahman, the Parsi, the followers of Confucius 
and Laotze in China, nay, the very believer in Un- 
kulunkulu — all are convinced that their own faith only 
is bright and beautiful and true, while that of all other 
people is dark and gloomy and bad. 

Now, I ask, is that a proper state of mind in which 
to approach the study of religions ? Would it not be 
far better to look in all religions for something that is 
good and true ? Should we be the losers if the Bud- 
dhist also held a truth which we ourselves hold ? Is 
a truth less true if it is believed in by other religions 
also ? There are, no doubt, many things in other re- 
ligions which strike us as strange, which offend us as 
gross, and which we feel inclined to reject at once as 
utterly false. I have had much to do, not only with 
what we call false religions and heresies, but also with 
these very heretics, and with honest believers in these 
false religions. Some of them, whether Brahman or 
Buddhists, or Parsis, or followers of Confucius, were 
most excellent men — -men of high character, of culti- 
vated minds, and perfectly honest in their arguments. 
There was no point of religion or philosophy which I 
could not discuss with them as freely as I discuss 
them with my own friends and colleagues. But I must 
confess that I by no means always got the best in 
these arguments. 

When discussing with a Buddhist priest from Japan, 
my excellent friend Bunyiu Nanjio, the question of 
prayer, I was startled when he declared to me that his 
sect considered prayer as sinful, as almost blasphe- 
mous. I tried to show him that prayer was a universal 
custom, that it seemed to arise from a most natural 
impulse of the human heart, that it was only an ex- 
pression of our own helplessness and of our trust in a 
higher power, and that, even if not granted, a prayer 
would help us to submit more readily to the inscrut- 
able decrees of a higher wisdom. But he would not 
yield. If we really believe, he said, in that higher 
wisdom, and in that higher power, it would be an in- 
sult to put our own small wisdom against that higher 
wisdom, or in any way to try to interfere with the 
workings of that higher power. You may adore and 
meditate, he said, you may trust and submit, but you 
must never ask, not even of Buddha, though he is full 
of pity and compassion. 

Again, when I tried to convince him that we are 



so made that we must believe in a Maker of the world, 
or in an Agent behind all the phenomena of nature, 
or, at least, in a first cause, he demurred. He did not 
say either Yes or No. He simply stated that Buddha 
had forbidden all inquiries into such matters, and that 
therefore he would not allow his mind to dwell on 
them. And how, he added, if you believe in an all- 
powerful, all-wise, all-loving Creator of the world, can 
you ascribe to him so imperfect a piece of workman- 
ship as this earth, and hold him responsible for all 
the suffering, the misery, the disease and crime which 
we witness in every part of our globe? 

I do not say that he convinced me, or that his ar- 
guments admitted of no reply. I only wish to show 
how many things that seem to us at first sight most 
irrational in foreign religions may admit of some ra- 
tional explanation, if not defence — may not be so ut- 
terly absurd as they appear at first sight. 



The great economic problem of the day is the re- 
lation between the two classes of wealth producers, 
popularly known as capitalists and workmen, which 
includes the practical question of their respective 
rights in the division of the property they join in cre- 
ating. The essential condition for the solution of 
this, as of any problem, is the ascertaining of the fac- 
tors on which it depends and their relative value. The 
statement of the present question implies that the only 
persons entitled to participate in the first instance in 
the distribution of wealth are those who, either per- 
sonally or by those whom they represent, have aided 
in its production. To understand aright, however, 
the position of these persons among themselves, it is 
necessary to determine, in the first place, the nature 
of wealth, and secondly, how it is created. In dealing 
with these two subjects I shall follow chiefly Mr. H. 
D. Macleod, whose "Elements of Economics" ought 
to be carefully studied as a strict application of Ba- 
conian methods. 

Wealth might be defined as anything having eco- 
nomic value, but such an explanation introduces other 
terms which themselves require definition. Aristotle 
declared that wealth consists of all things whose value 
is measured by money, and it is now recognised that 
an economic "quantity" is anything whatever whose 
value can be measured in money. This definition sup- 
plies the criterion of wealth, the essential principle of 
which is exchangeability. Therefore wealth, in its 
widest sense, is defined as anything that can be ex- 
changed, or in the words of Mill, which has the power 
of purchasing. This definition has to be supplemented, 
however, by the observation that a thing to be ex- 
changeable must have value. The determination of 

what constitutes value and of the source of this quality 
will furnish the conditions of the economic problem 
under consideration. 

There can be only one test of value as an economic 
quantity, namely, demand, which depends on the pos- 
session of something by one person and the desire for 
it by another. It is evident, therefore, that for a 
"phenomenon of value," that is an exchange, to take 
place, there must be "the reciprocal desire or de- 
mand of two persons, each for the product of the 
other." Thus we may say that what constitutes value 
is reciprocal demand. This conclusion does not in- 
form us, however, of the actual origin and cause of 
value, which can be best ascertained by acting on the 
principle laid down by Bacon, who says that "the in- 
duction which is to be available for the discovery and 
demonstration of sciences and arts must analyse nature 
by proper rejections and exclusions, and then after a 
sufficient number of negatives, come to a conclusion 
on the affirmative instances." It was declared by 
Locke that labor is the cause of all value, and McCul- 
loch, applj'ing this principle, affirms that "in its nat- 
ural state matter is rarely possessed of any immediate 
or direct utility, and is always destitute of value. It 
is only through the labor expended on its appropria- 
tion, and on fitting and preparing it for being used, 
that matter acquires exchangeable value, and becomes 
wealth." That this statement is erroneous, and there- 
fore that labor is not the cause of value, is evidenced 
by the fact that labor may be. bestowed without the 
object of it, be it land or a movable thing, thereby ac- 
quiring value. Moreover, if labor is the sole cause of 
value, it would follow (i), that all differences or varia- 
tions in value must be due to differences or variations 
in labor ; (2), that all things produced by the same 
quantity of labor must be of equal value ; (3), that the 
value must be proportional to the labor ; and (4), that 
a thing once produced by labor must always have value 
and the same value. There is no difficulty in showing 
that none of these inferences are true, and from a con- 
sideration of the examples he adduces, Mr. Macleod 
concludes that labor is not in anyway whatever "the 
form or the cause of value, or even necessary to value. " 
This conclusion is confirmed by the consideration that 
if labor is the sole cause of value it must be the cause 
of its own value, an idea which will not be entertained 
by any one. The real relation between them, as 
pointed out by Whately, is that labor is an accident 
of value in a certain class of cases, which must be af- 
firmed also of materiality and durability, neither of 
which is necessary to value, that is, things may have 
this property without those qualities. Nor is value 
based on utility, as is sometimes asserted ; since things 
may be useful in one place and not in another, and 
however useful a thing may be the more abundant it 



is the less its value. In fact, some objects, such as 
diamonds, may be of great value and of little use. 

The fact is that value does not belong to any ob- 
ject for its own sake, nor does it depend on human 
labor. It is really an affection of the mind, and its 
source is demand as the expression of desire. Without 
demand there can be no value, and the amount of 
value depends, the supply being the same, on the 
quantum of demand. This was the view of Aristotle, 
and of the Roman jurists, and it is that of all modern 
economists. McCulloch says clearly, " the desire of 
individuals to possess themselves of articles, or rather 
the demand for them originating in that desire, is the 
sole cause oi their being produced or appropriated." 
It is the demand of the consumer, and not the labor 
of the producer, which constitutes a thing wealth, and 
hence demand is the inducement to labor, which with- 
out it would have no value. 

The principle here laid down applies no less to 
capital than to labor. By capital is meant a head or 
source, that from which increase or profit flows, and 
therefore whatever when used gives a profit is capital. 
It is evident that this rule does not limit capital to 
money. Personal qualities are as useful for the pro- 
duction of profit as money, and they form the basis of 
the whole system of credit to which the wonderful de- 
velopment of modern commerce is chiefly due. It has 
been well said that " labor is the poor man's capital," 
and in fact capital and labor are merely different forms 
of wealth, as having exchangeable value. They both 
participate in the production of that which is re- 
quired to supply the demand on which value depends, 
and they are equally valueless unless put to use. 
Capital and labor are thus different kinds of property, 
using this term in its original sense of "right," and 
not simply in relation to things. Any right having 
exchangeable value is a form of property, and hence 
personal rights which can be used for profit, or have 
a money value, are as much property as money, land 
or houses. Land stands on exactly the same economic 
footing as capital, and a due regard for this fact would 
prevent many bitter contentions as to the natural 
ownership of land. The total value of land " consists 
in the right to the past products of the soil, together 
with the right to a series of future profits or products 
forever"; to which should be added that these products 
depend in great measure on the use of capital in its 
forms of money and labor. A merchant having capital 
invested in trade, or possessing credit owing to his 
personal qualities, answers to the land owner. He 
has the right to his accumulated profits, and to the 
future profits to be earned by the use of his money, 
and by his personal capital in the form of skill and 
mercantile character. 

We have thus arrived at the conclusion that labor 

is a form of capital, and that the value of both "cap- 
ital " and labor is due to their ability to supply the 
demand on which value depends. There is, however, 
another factor besides demand which enters into the 
question of value. The demand for any particular 
form of property may be small or great, and the supply 
may vary in the same way, so that the value of the 
propert}' is also liable to vary. This principle is the 
general law of value, or the general equation of eco- 
nomics, and Mr. Macleod shows that it is universally 
applicable, and not merely, as some economists sup- 
pose, when prices are very high or very low. He 
says: "No other quantities but demand and supply 
appear on the face of the equation : we therefore 
learn that no other causes influence value or changes 
of value, except intensity of demand and limitation of 
supply. We learn that neither labor nor cost of pro- 
duction can have any direct influence on value : and that 
if they do so indirectly, it can only be by and through 
the means of affecting the demand or the supply : and 
that no change of labor or cost of production can have 
any influence on value unless they produce a change 
in the relation of supply and demand." 

In conclusion, I am not concerned to lay down any 
particular rules for the division of profits or products 
between the two classes of workers or wealth pro- 
ducers, the capitalist or rather trader — for as we have 
seen all men who work for a reward are wealth crea- 
tors and therefore capitalists — and those who assist 
the trader in his work. The former is the possessor 
of the source of profit money, or the credit which 
represents it, and the latter is the possessor of the 
source of profit personal labor, both of which have a 
market value. The personal equation must be added 
in either case, however, and this fact renders it more 
difficult than it would otherwise be to estimate the ex- 
act proportions of profit which any particular person 
is entitled to. But as between traders as a class on 
the one side, and their employees on the other the 
difficulty would not be so great ; it being remembered 
nevertheless that only those employees are entitled to 
participate in profits, as such and not as wages, whose 
labor is distinctly profit producing. It may be added 
that this share of profits may be paid either as in- 
creased wages or by way of bonus. There are two 
points which should be always kept in mind in dealing 
with the great economic question we have been con- 
sidering. The one is that the two forms of capital, 
money and labor, are equally necessary to each other, 
and that it is, therefore, the interest of the working 
class (so called) that capital should increase as much 
as possible to compete for labor. "When working 
men," says Mr. Macleod, "complain of the tyrann}' 
of capital and the low price of their labor, it is. not the 
tyrann)' of capital which is their enemy, but the tyranny 


of their own excessive numbers." The other point to 
be kept in mind is that economics cannot be divorced 
from ethics. That which is right, as demanded by 
fairness between man and man, is also expedient, as 
being in the long run the most economical from a 
business standpoint. 


Envy of the rich is a very common feeling among the 
poor. And why is it so common ? Because the rich 
are more fortunate in possessing wordly goods to sat- 
isfy not only their needs, but also any unnecessary 
wants. They have the means of procuring for them- 
selves whenever they please all sorts of pleasures 
which because they are expensive lie outside the reach 
of the poor. 

It is true that the rich have the means to procure 
themselves pleasures in an extraordinarily higher de- 
gree than the poor ; but if the poor imagine that for 
that reason they actually enjoy life and life's pleasures 
better than the poor, they are greatly mistaken. 

This is true in several respects. First the zest of 
pleasures is lost, if they are procured without trouble. 
Pleasure cannot be bought, pleasure must be felt, and 
the capability of having pleasure depends upon sub- 
jective and not upon objective conditions. The man 
who does not work lessens his capability of enjoyment 
in the same degree as he ceases to be in need of re- 
creations ; and pleasure which is no recreation after 
serious toil, which is not the satisfaction of a want, 
soon ceases to be a real pleasure, it becomes flat, stale 
and unprofitable. 

The rich, in order to remain healthy in his spirit, 
in his sentiments, in his recreations and wants, must 
live like the poor man — not like those who are wretched 
and destitute, but like those who work for a living. 
The rich, be they ever so rich, must, for the mere 
sake of their mental and moral health, continue to be 
active, and their activity must have an aim and pur- 
pose, it must be productive of some good, it must be 
work of some kind. 

The pleasures of the poor are, as a rule, richer and 
deeper in color than those of a certain class of typ- 
ically rich people — viz., such rich people who notice- 
ably appear and wish to appear as rich among their 
less fortunate fellow creatures ; and the reason of this 
difference lies deeper still than in a mere lack of exer- 
tion and wholesome activity on the part of the rich. 
One of the most irresistible temptations of the rich, it 
appears, is their eagerness to be distinguished from 
their fellowmen as a special class of men, a peculiar and 
a higher species of the human kind. This is a disease 
which may be called aristocratomania, and it is one of 
the most deplorable diseases, not uncommonly prov- 
ing fatal to the existence of noble and great families. 

Aristocratomania is a disease which erects a barrier 
between special classes of men, not because the one 
is actually better, wiser, more moral, or nobler in 
character than the other, but because the one can in- 
dulge in luxuries in which the other cannot. 

The aristocratomaniac is no aristocrat in the etymo- 
logical and good sense of the word. He is not a better 
man than the rest of mankind ; he is worse, he is a 
degeneration. His soul instead of being enlarged and 
widened has shrunk, and in the measure as it has 
shrunk it has lost in human interest, sympathy, and 

The aristocratomaniac is perhaps charitable, he is 
kind, but his charity and his kindness appear offensive 
as soon as they are properly analysed, for their main 
element is a superstitious condescension. 

The state of aristocratomaniacs is ridiculous and 
pitiable. It is ridiculous because of the vanity of their 
pride ; it is pitiable because of the shriveled condition 
of their souls. The punctilious observance of social 
formalities has taken the place of cordiality and truth-' 
fulness. The fashionable ceremonial of society life 
has become the highest rule of conduct, but the real 
sentiments which ought to underlie the forms of social 
intercourse are neglected and forgotten. 

The highest object of the" aristocratomaniac is to 
burn incense before the altar of his God — the Puny 
Self which is fed with flattery and vanity. No emotion 
is permitted which would conflict with this deity, for 
great is the Puny Self and he is almighty in the soul 
of the aristocratomaniac. 

Whenever the aristocratomaniac has injured or 
has given offense to his fellowman, the little word : 
"I beg your pardon," which by natural impulse wells 
up in a human soul, remains unspoken because the 
great Puny Self sees in it a humilation of his majesty. 

Why is there so little warmth in the family life of 
aristocratomaniacs ? Brothers and sisters among the 
poor help one another, they rejoice at their joys and 
bear their woes in common. Does wealth produce a 
chill in the atmosphere so as to freeze out all cordiality 
and goodwill ? Does wealth beget dissatisfaction, 
envy, jealousy, ill-will among men? Is the old Nibe- 
lungen-saga true that a curse rests on gold which will 
lead its owner to perdition? Certainly it takes a strong 
character to be wealthy and to remain human, kind- 
natured and broad-minded. The dearest and most 
sacred affections are too easily suffocated among the 
thorns and thistles of worldly goods. Proud of their 
possession of worldly goods the higher goods of truly 
human feelings are lost. As the mother of Christ 
said to Elizabeth : 

" God hath filled the hungry with good things and the rich he 
hath sent empty away." 



There are several causes of aristocratomania, for 
it is a very complicated disease and its symptoms 
show themselves in different ways, but one cause ap- 
pears to be its main source and this one cause is the 
lack of solidarity with the interests of aspiring, toiling 
and progressing mankind. That which kindles sym- 
pathies in the hearts of men are common labor, com- 
mon sorrows, common wants and common hopes. 
There is nothing of that between the aristocrato- 
maniac and his fellowmen. He has with other aris- 
tocratomaniacs common joys, common fancies and 
fashions, common comforts and a common pride. But 
these feelings do not kindle sympathies. 

There is a peculiar and a manlike sympathy in the 
dog who drags the cart of his poor master and earns a 
living as his help mate, sharing his master's labor and 
bread. But there is no such amiability in the snarling 
pug who idles away his time in the lap of his idle 
mistress. He is egotistic, impertinent and dissatis- ■ 
fied. He has also become infected with aristocrato- 
mania, for dissatisfaction is one of the most telling 
symptoms of the disease.' Says Goethe in describing 
the symptoms of aristocratomania : 

" They 're of a noble house, that's very clear 
Haughty and discontented they appear." 
There are among the poor a class of people who 
either from lack of strength, because the burdens of 
life are heavier than they can bear, or from lack of 
courage and good will, because they do not intend to 
work, for a living, become spiteful and bitter. This 
disease is in many respects similar to aristocratomania. 
The aristocratomaniac feels himself exempt from the 
common lot of mortals, the spiteful poor thinks that 
he also ought to be exempt. He has the predisposi- 
tion of becoming an aristocratomaniac, and being 
hopelessly shut out from the class to which his in- 
stinct leads him, he dreams of rising above the crowd 
of common mortals with the help of the masses by 
preaching hatred and destruction. This is the Marrat 
type of the demagogue, vanity, egotism and ambition 
are but too often the motives of him who pretends to 
be a reformer, imitating Christ in his denunciations 
only but not in his charity, love and self-renunciation. 
One of the most prominent social agitatdrs actually 
exposed his main spring of action in quoting Virgil's 
verse : 

' ' Flectere si nequeo superos Acheronta movebo. 
[Can I not bend the Gods, I'll stir the under world.] 

Moral health cannot be found in the aristocrato- 
maniac nor in the would-be aristocratomaniac, but in 
the patient and plodding worker, be he rich or poor. 
He who has risen in his imagination above mankind 
and the sorrows of mankind has cut himself loose from 
the tree of humanity. The fate of aristocratomaniac 
families as a rule is sealed. They are doomed. Life 

is activity and wherever life ceases to be activity, it 
dries up and withers away. 

Is this perhaps the meaning of Christ when he said 

"A rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle 
than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." 

These passages are strong and what they teach 
should not remain unheeded. There are two lessons 
which they teach, one of warning and the other of 
comfort. The warning is for the rich not to erect a 
barrier between themselves and humanity, not to al- 
low their souls to be shriveled by wealth and pride of 
class, for the poor, not to be blinded by the advan- 
tages of wealth ; wealth is not happiness and does not 
convey happiness. The real contents of life, its mean- 
ing, its import and its worth cannot be expressed in 
dollars and cents. We have to create the actual 
values of life ourselves. 

But there is in Christ's. words about the rich also 
a solace. The solace is for those who live their lives 
in the sweat of their brows. Life's strength is labor 
and sorrow. Let us not expect a different fate and 
we shall the more easily be able to meet the duties of 
life and to conform to the unalterable laws of mental 
and moral growth. 

Let us not lose time with complaints, but let us be 
like Horatio : 

" As one, in suffering all that suffers nothing, 
A man that Fortune's buffets and rewards 
Has ta'en with equal thanks." 

Let us preserve the elasticity of our minds and if we 
have to drudge, if we are surrounded with difficulties 
and disappointments, we shall bear them gladly and 
grow the stronger through their resistance. It is said 
that the palm tree, if weighed down by some heavy 
stone grows the more stately and the more straight 
raising its crown above all the other trees which either 
do not experience any resistance, or if they did, would 
not have the strength to overcome its pressure, p. c. 




Theology began to ooze out of politics when, tired of hypoc- 
risy, the people of England set up May poles in honor of the re- 
turn of the second Charles, and. incidentally, of cakes and ale. 
After this it kept on oozing pretty fast ; and when Dutch William 
was well in saddle there really seemed to be nothing much left 
worth quarreling about and not a few staunch old Rounders went 
about saying it was ' ' all day " with politics. What nonsense ! 
With near two hundred years between them and a Tammany and 
a tariff to make the angels weep. 

Wouldn't it be a grand thing if theology could be hustled out 
of common sense. I mean just what I say, so that common sense 



could be had neat. Now, you go to any misfit religion store, and 
ask for a few yards of unbleached common sense, and the sales- 
person, in spite of every effort on your part, will persist in doing 
up with the bundle several skeins of sewing tljeology. Some will 
admit that its only for basting ; others insist that the goods must 
be made up with it. Then there are other notion stores especially 
in the country where you cannot purchase the unbleached article 
at any price. Some establishments claim to keep the real thing 
in stock ; but when you get a sample and take it home, you find 
invariably that either it won't wash, or has been dyed some sort 
of color. Of course you go back the next day, and tell the man 
how it is and remonstrate. It is possible he may be liberal enough 
to say he will try and see what he can do. that he will send and 
get it ; but these instances are rare. I have had shop-keepers, [the 
"you press the button, we do the rest" sort] tell me to my face 
over and over again that I was mistaken in supposing it was the 
unbleached I wanted ; that the lavender was much the most ser- 
viceable, or the raspberry roan, or some such color,' more becom- 
ing to my style of beauty, 

"But," I say, "just look at this dress I have on. It is made 
of the unbleached material, is quite folly proof and wears like 

Invariably the man declines to look. He is usually civil, be- 
cause he wants me to trade ; but he declines to look. Oh, dear ! 
oh, dear ! Now I am not prepared to say that dyed stuffs do not 
have their uses, nor that basting thread is utterly valueless. If I 
habitually wore a dress that would come off in the street if not 
sewed up with some particular kind of thread, I incline to the 
opinion that rather than go naked I would get some. And if 
wearing an unbleached garment made me a laughing stock, I pre- 
sume I should wear a dyed one. The point I make is very simple ; 
only that shop-keepers should keep the goods I require in stock, 
rather than put me to the trouble and expense of sending to the 

Some tell me (and I believe them) that there is really little or 
no demand for unbleached common sense. What I am trying to 
do is to create a demand — see ! 

This matter of " sides" to the great question of life is to me 
a wonder. Taken all around mankind is a comical race. No one 
"takes sides "in mathematics. Why should they in some other 
things ? What would you think of one (say a prohibitionist on 
principle) who decided in his own mind that the arithmetic 
abounded in false doctrine because two jugs of rum and three jugs 
of rum made five jugs of rum ? Comical, isn't it ? 

Did you ever hear of Mr. Francis Bacon ? Those of you who 
have been in Wisconsin and made the acquaintance of Ignatius 
Donnelly, have I feel sure ; and yet I very much doubt if 3'ou 
thoroughly understand the good that man did for the world. 
Morally he seems to have been a corrupt man, and it is barely 
possible that he did not write Shakespeare ; but he took a new de- 
parture in physical science by demanding proof of all statements 
found in books concerning the operations of nature. If he found 
a statement in a book, he didn't believe it because it was there ; 
nor, on the other hand, did he disbelieve it. He said, let us ex- 
periment, and find out for ourselves if it is true or not. In this 
way he arrived at several important results, and set others on the 
road to arriving. Among others he helped set me, which was 
perhaps unfortunate. 

Then there was Niebuhr. Did you ever hear of him ? He 
was an historian, and he made a new departure in historical writing 
by invariably consulting original documents. He thought, as I 
confess I do myself, that facts have a tendency to improve a work 
on history. 

Harriet Martineau was another person who seemed to have 
gotten hold of the same general idea. Did you ever hear that story 
about what she said to the old Gossip ? Well, it seems the gossip 

came in, and began to relate some scandal about what a neighbor 
said derogatory to Miss Martineau's character. 

Miss Martineau never retorted by saying that the neighbor 
was a ' ' huzzy, " nor ' ' a mean thing, " nor that she was ' ' another, " 
nor anything of that sort. She only rang the bell, and when the 
domestic came sent for her "things," and when the "things" 
came put them on, and then said, sweetly as you please, to the 
gossip : " Now, ray dear, I ara ready ; suppose we go." 

" Go where ? " says the Gossip in a flutter. 

"Why, to the neighbor's, of course." 

" And what for ? " 

"To inquire, of course," says Miss Martineau. 

Now the very last thing in the world old Gossip wanted was 
inquiry. She " didn't want to get mixed up " ; what was said was 
"told in confidence," and all that. She begged to be let off, but 
Harriet was firm. What the result was I have forgotten. Oh ! 
I'd like to have gone along incog. I expect there was a "racket." 
One thing I feel sure of: Harriet kept cool and came out "on 
top." Another thing you can safely reckon on ; gossiping went 
out of vogue in the neighborhood where Miss Martineau lived. 

But to get back to "taking sides." You observe I said that 
no one takes sides in mathematics. I wrote that last April, and 
only this week I found that I had been too hasty. It never does 
to be too hasty. One ought to wait till one is sure before being 

A gentleman has an office in the same building with me who 
now and then drops in to hunt up a precedent, or to get advice as 
to a rule of practice. Only the other day he happened in again, 
and somehow, both of us having leisure, we fell to talking about 
" views." A good deal of nonsense was talked — deference to my 
friend prevents me saying by which of us, — till he told me that 
" he was so constituted " as to be quite sure that mathematics had 
no existence except in minds, — subjective business, you know, — 
the same old row broken out afresh. Whew ! how he talked — 
learned was no name for it. Plato, William Hamilton, Aristotle, 
and all the pestilent brood of guessers. Now, I am not learned ; 
but I can tell yarns. I pitched in, and told one to my friend, — a 
sort of scientific yarn, about how the world, from this on, pro- 
gressed, and progressed, and progressed ; and how the human race 
got older and wiser, till even babes used logarithms. Also how at 
the same time the solar heat gradually diminished. The Erie 
Canal was closed all the year round ; then an ice bridge formed 
(and stayed) across Long Island Sound ; and the wheat crops failed 
except in Central Africa, and the people began to grow scarce, for 
want of food ; then only a few sheltered nooks along the Congo 
were inhabited, and finally only one poor old Hottentot was left. 
Think of that situation ! One Hottentot, and he laid up with 

You recall the boat that carried Caesar and his fortunes. What 
a fuss people of a rhetorical turn do make over that incident. But 
what about the Hottentot? It looks to me as if he too had a pretty 
heavy responsibility. Imagine Mathematics waiting about and 
preparing to die with the last man. Don't say you can't imagine 
it. Remember that my friend said he coiilJtit imagine anything 

Well, you give it up, do you ? After mature consideration of 
the yediii/io aJ abstirdum you are prepared to state your positive 
conviction that Pure Mathematics is of more value than many 

And yet (for after all the subtle and simple were born twins) 
Mathematics may only exist in a mind. But is that mind of ne- 
cessity a man's ? Is there not possibly a universal mind of which 
Mathematics is a function ? This universal mind cannot be like 
ours, a limited individuality ; but would it be the worse for that ? 
I do not dogmatise. I only ask for information ; but I must say 
it looks plausible. 




We have received from Minneapolis the following "Brief 
Statement of the Principles of the Humanitarian Alliance "' 
" Humanitarianism, like any other dcctrine, must have a basis to 
build upon. To give it authority it must embody a world con- 
ception which will be in perfect harmony with its teachings. As 
its teachings are drawn from science, all its conclusions must be 
in accordance with scientific premises, which will necessarily 
force Its defenders and advocates to premise with the facts of the 
universe instead of with the unsupported vagaries of the enlight- 
ened human mind. From the standpoint of induction and scien- 
tific evolution, it contemplates the whole of the human race, dif- 
ferentiated as it is, as children of one parent, and emphatically 
declares that good and evil are simply relative terms. Instead of 
condemning mankind for their different expressions of beliefs, it 
charitably condones ; because it positively affirms that all forms 
and conditions are the sole evolutions of nature ; and that man- 
kind, suffering as they do, are more to be pitied than blamed. 

' ' Humanitarianism regards punishment as a necessary cause of 
deterrence while vicious characteristics in mankind last ; a means 
to an end ; not to meet out revenge or retaliation. 

" Man's relation to the universe, of which he is a part, is such 
that he must be held responsible for his actions, because he is un- 
avoidably a factor in every combination which affects the weal or 
woe of society. 

"As progress is the order of evolution and mankind are nec- 
essary factors in the operation, humanitarianism teaches that it is 
the duty of all who are in harmony with its doctrine to organise 
for the promulgation of truth, for the destruction of superstition 
and for the formation of an environment which will assist the 
weak in their moral and intellectual growth. 

"Humanitarianism positively affirms that the doctrine of in- 
spired revelation given once for all is absolutely false, because in 
the order of progress there must be continual adaptation to meet 
the demands of the successive moral and intellectual development 
of the human race. 

"It rejects the doctrine of miracles, because miracle is im- 
possible in a universe of cause and effect. It also rejects the doc- 
trines of vicarious atonement and divine forgiveness of sins, be- 
cause the relativeness of things in nature prevents the positive- 
ness of sin, and the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, be- 
cause it is evident that the body dissolves and becomes assimilated 
with the earth. As regards the future, humanitarianism is opti- 
mistic. It contemplates nature as too wise, powerful and ingen- 
ious to make a mistake, and it enjoins all mankind to confidently 
trust in the mighty power of evolution, which alone can effectually 
accomplish the resurrection and ascension — the complete elevation 
and development of all mankind. 

"But its motto is, ' One world at a time,' and to encourage 
individual effort in the great work of amelioration here and now. 
"Humanitarianism will respectfully criticise for the sake of 
progress, but it will not denounce. As no man or woman is in- 
fallible in all things, all lectures and speeches must be subject to 
respectful criticism, and all doctrinal decisions must be based 
upon the credentials of science, not settled by majority vote (as in 
the case with ecclesiastical councils), so that truth alone will stand 
for authority, not postulated authority for truth." 

The Humanitarian Alliance proposes the following articles of 
federation : '■ Humanitarianism enjoins all of its members to sub- 
scribe as much as in them lies to one all pervading unity, without 
beginning or end, incapable of increase or diminution ; [Nature 
is a unity] to accept the world as their country and all men as 
their brethren ; to accept observation, experience and natural en- 
lightenment as teachers, and reason with a right premise as their 
only guide ; to demand no more than they are willing to render 
and to allow the same liberties to others that they desire for them- 

selves ; to encourage one another to meet the inevitable with forti- 
tude, and to courageously acknowledge the majesty of truth ; to 
submit to the decrees of wisdom, and to respect the opinions of 
others — when not dogmatically laid down as truth ; to cherish 
virtue, propriety, benevolence, sincerity, reciprocity, and kindness, 
aiming to make all events profitable, all days holy, and all actions 
worthy of emulation ; to stand by the glorious principles of our 
republic that teach the sovreignty of the individual and which de- 
mand the entire separation of church and state." 

The document is signed by John Maddock, Secretary, Pro 
Tem. (2123 Lincoln St., N. E., Minneapolis, Minn.) and by Dr. 
J. S. Seeley, President, Pro Tem. 


The House OF THE WoLFiNGS. By ]Villiai}i Morris. London : 1890. 
Reeves & Turner. ig6 Strand. 

The House of the Wolfings is a legendary romance, partly 
prose and partly poetry, but mostly poetry ; a spirited story of 
'the wars and ways of the Wolfings, a tribe of the ancient Goths, 
the crest on whose banner was a wolf, and who dwelt on the 
Welsh border, just before the Romans' withdrew from Britain. 
The body of it is a stimulating description of battles, fought by 
the Wolfings against the Romans, who had invaded their terri- 
tories for "booty and beauty," but who were defeated after much 
hard fighting by Thiodolf the War-Duke of the Wolfings, who 
v/as himself slain in the last fight, as he knew he would be, be- 
cause he had been forewarned by the Hall-Sun, a beautiful 
maiden who had the gift of prophecy through psychological pow- 
ers, a sort of medium, who spoke through inspiration, as one in a 
trance, after the manner of the modern spiritualists. In fact she 
was hardly mortal, but a re-incarnation brought mysteriously, if 
not miraculously into being. It must be said in her favor that 
she prophesies in picturesque poetry highly spiritual, and warm 
with the natural beauty of the summer time. She could not say, like 
the soothsayer to Lochiel, " 'Tis the sunset of life gives me mys- 
tical lore," for her pictures of the future were painted by the sun- 

The story has a martial sound all through, like the striking 
of spears on a shield, the challenge of the Wolfings, and their 
clamor of defiance. An important part of its charm is the lan- 
guage in which it is told, a very triumph of our old Anglo-Saxon 
speech. With amazing skill Mr. Morris has wrought out a story 
abounding in graphic descriptions of the beauties of nature, of 
primitive home life, of marches and battles, without calling to his 
aid the latinised words which seem to be indispensable to our lan- 
guage now. The speeches of his hearers too, are full of strength 
and meaning, yet nearly every word, perhaps every word, is Eng- 
lish of the Saxon line. In this respect alone, the work is valuable 
as a study of what can be done by the unaided Anglo-Saxon 
tongue. Occasionally a latinised word appears like "mumtion," 
but probably more through oversight than from necessity. 

Mr. Morris modestly calls his book, "A tale of the House of 
the Wolfings and all the Kindreds of the Mark, written in prose 
and in verse." He makes no claim for it as poetry, only " verse ;" 
and yet it is very good poetry too ; even the prose of it might 
easily be arranged as verse if artfully broken into lines — beginning 
with capitals, and properly punctuated. For instance, the de- 
scription of Thiodolf, though told in running prose in the ordinary 
way, might easily be arranged into blank verse, like this : 
" Stiort, and curling close to his head was liis black hair, 

Grizzled a little, so that it looked like rings of hard dark iron : 

His forehead was high and smooth, his lips full and red. 

His eyes wide open and steady, and all his face 

Joyous with the thought of the fame of his deeds, 

And the battle with a foeman whom the Markmen knew not yet. 

He was a man well beloved of women, 

.And children ran to him gladly to play with him. 



A most fell warrior was he, whose deeds, 

No man of the Mark could equal ; 

Blythe of speech even when sorrowful of mood, 

A man that knew not bitterness of heart : 

And for all his exceeding might and valiancy. 

He was proud and high to no man, so that the thralls. 

Even the thralls loved him." 

Nearly all the prose in the book might be done into blank 
verse like that, much of it better than that, which is only another 
example that the prose of some writers is poetry, while the poetry 
of others is prose. 

In some of the dialogue there is much of mystical grandeur, 
as in that between Thiodolf and the Hall-Sun, wherein he says: 

" I have deemed, and long have I deemed that this is my second life. 
That my first one waned with my wounding when thou cam'st to the ring 

of strife. 
For when in thine arms I wakened on the hazelled field of yore, 
Me seemed I had newly arisen to a world I knew no more." 

And his guardian angel, the Hall-Sun, who in spirit had been- 
with him in all his battles, will not be with him in the next one, 
and she tells her vision thus : 

" In forty fights hast thou foughten, and beside thee who but I 

Beheld the wind-tossed banners, and saw the aspen fly. 

But to-day to thy war I wend not, for Weird withholdeth me 

And sore my heart forebodeth for the battle that shall be 

For thee among strange people and the foeman's throng have trod. 
And I tell thee their banner of battle is a wise and a mighty God. 
For these are the folk of the cities, and in wondrous wise they dwell 
Mid confusion of heaped house?, dim and black as the face of hell." 

In the dialogue between Thiodolf and the Wood-Sun, just be- 
fore his last battle we get a glimpse of this old Goth's idea of the 
continuation, or more theologically speaking, the immortality, of 
the soul. 

" Thiodolf," she said, "How long shall our love last ?" 

" As long as our life," he said. 

" And if thou diest to-day, where then shall our love be ?" said the Wood- 

" He said, " I must not say, I wot not ; though time was I had said. It 
shall abide with the soul of the Wolfing Kindred." 

She said, " And when that soul dieth. and the kindred is no more ?" 

" Time agone," quoth he, "I had said, it shall abide with the Kindred of 
the Earth ; but now again I say, I wot not." 

And afterwards, when the battle was done and Thiodolf slain, 
she announced his death as merely another life in these words, 
"O men in this Hall the War-Duke is dead ! O people hearken ! 
for Thiodolf the Mighty hath changed his life !" 

In the social theories, and religious thoughts which Mr. Mor- 
ris finds among those ancient Goths, we may read some of the 
new politics which is agitating their posterity in England, Amer- 
ica, and Germany ; and it is all worth reading. 


We have received a circular of the "Illinois Woman's Al- 
liance," containing a statement of the principles of the association 
and a list of reforms urged upon the administration of the city of 
Chicago. They refer to Education and to the Health and Police 
Departments ; persons interested may apply to the corresponding 
secretary, 10 State St., Room 209, Chicago. 

A very interesting article appeared in the last number of the 
Amt'yican Journal of Psyi/iology on " Arithmetical Prodigies," by 
Dr. E W. Scripture. The wonderful powers of the great mental 
arithmeticians and calculators are subjected to a psychological 
analysis, which sheds considerable light on the possible greater 
cultivation of normal capacities. The article is also published in 
brochure form. (Worcester : Blanchard & Co.) 





, OF NO. 3 (a 

1891) : 

The Fact 
The Phys 


The Question of Duality of Mind. By R. M. BACHE. 
Immortality. By DR G. M. GOULD. 

Some Questions of Psycho-Physics. A Discussion: (i) Sensations and the 
Elements of Reality, by PROF. ERNST MACH ; (2) Feelings and the 
Elements of Feeling, by DR PAUL CARUS. 

1) France— ARREAT. 

2) Italy— LOMBROSO. 

Book Reviews : Taylor's Origin of the Aryans: Harris's Introduction to Phi- 
losophy : Geddes's and Thompson's Evolution of Sex: Morgan's Animal 
Life and Intelligence : Mantee;azza's Physiognotny and Expression : Booth's 
In Darkest England : Cams Sterne's Allgerneine IVeltansckauung in ihrer 
historischen Entwickelung ; and Post's Allgevieine Rechtsuoissenschaft. 

Periodicals : Epitomes and critical reviews of the contents of Mind, Inter- 
national Journal of Ethics, Revue Philosophigue, Zeitschriftfiir Psychologie 
und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane, Schriften der Gesellschaft fur psycho- 
logische Forschung^ Philosophische Monatshefte, Minerva (Italian), Voprosy 
filosofii ipsichologii (Russian). 


Terms of Subscription : S2.00 a year, postpaid, to any pan of the United 
States, Canada, and Mexico; to foreign countries in the Postal Union, S2.25 i 
single numbers, 60 cents; postpaid to New South Wales, Victoria, Queens- 
land, Tasmania, S2.50 a year. 



LONDOK: Messrs. Watts 6^ Co., 

/7 Johnson's Court, Fleet Street, E. C. 




$3.00 PER YEAR. $i.oa FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 


{Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 




Mueller 2843 


C. Staniland Wake 2S44 


SOME NONSENSE. With a Pure Mathematical Moral. 

HuDOR Genone 2847 


NOTES 2850 

The Open Cour 


Devoted to the ^AAork of Conciliating Religion with Science. 



No. 200. (Vol. V.-18.) 

CHICAGO JUNE 25 1891. 

\ Two Dollars per Year. 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



The old theology asks us to believe that the rela- 
tions between God and man were radically different 
at some former period of history than now, that they 
were more intimate and personal. Is it probable that 
man's relation to the air, the water, the earth, has 
ever been any more intimate and vital than now; that 
his food ever nourished him in any other way than 
it does now, that offspring were ever begotten by any 
other method, or that the relations of men to each 
other were ever essentially any different from the 
present? If God is not a constant and invariable 
power he is nothing. Does gravity intermit ? Are not 
the celestial bodies always on time? Are not life 
death generation always subject to the same laws ? 
The moral and religious nature of man rises and sinks ; 
he seems more conscious of God and of divine things 
in some period of history than in others, in some 
races than in others, but this is a fluctuation doubt- 
less governed by natural causes, if we could penetrate 
them, and is not the result of any change of plan or 
purpose of the Eternal. God walked and talked with 
men in the patriarchal days, because men interpreted 
their own thoughts, dreams, desires, motions, as the 
voice of God. We define and differentiate things 
more nowadays, though probably the old prophets 
were strictly correct, for is not man himself a mani- 
festation of God ? With the devout and religious 
habit of mind comes the boldness to ascribe all our 
thoughts and promptings and happenings to God. It 
is the not-ourselves that rules and controls us and in 
which we live and move and have our being, and 
whether we call it God, or by any other name the fact 
remains the same. The religious mind gives it one 
name; the scientific mind another; the former makes 
it personal and sustains a personal relation to it ; the 
other makes it impersonal and names it law or force. 
Indeed the dispute between the saint and the sci- 
entist is not as to a matter of fact, but as to a matter 
of feeling. One reaches through consciousness, what 
the other reaches through intellect, and the results 
differ just as the media differ. There is fear, love, 
hope, and other emotions mingled with the one ex- 
perience, but there is none of these things mingled 

with the other. Indeed one is an experience while the 
other is a rational process. 


The region of the unconscious in one, so much 
more deep and potent in some men than in others, is 
our hold upon the eternal. The disclosure of thoughts, 
of knowledge, of power that we did not know we pos- 
sessed — these things may be said to be from God. 
The Biblical writers ascribed all spontaneous thoughts 
to God. Such were a revelation. When these men 
looked deep into their hearts they found God there 
and they conversed with him freely. What we call com- 
muning with ourselves, the religious mind calls com- 
muning with God. Every writer, every orator knows 
what it is to see depths and views open in his mind 
that are a surprise to him, and that but a moment be- 
fore he was ignorant of. This is inspiration. All 
scriptures are given by inspiration, because they come 
not by way of the reason and the understanding, but 
by way of the conscience and the spiritual sense ; all 
poetry the same. We call it God or we call it genius, 
just according to our training and habit of mind. The 
mind does open sometimes and refuses to open at 
others. Undoubtedly a man has or has not a capacity 
for great and high thoughts. How the thoughts arise 
is as great a mystery to him as to another. In our 
speech of to-day we do not ascribe these things to 
God — that is to any objective agency or power ex- 
ternal to ourselves ; it is a purely subjective phenom- 
enon, as much so as the seeing of visions or the dream- 
ing of dreams. Mohammed thought he saw and 
talked with Gabriel and once with God ; St. Paul be- 
lieved he heard a voice and saw a light from heaven : 
we call them mental hallucinations; the man's own 
conscience, or fears or hopes, or thoughts seen ex- 
ternally; but they were as real to them as any out- 
ward object. The other day a man in Philadelphia 
died from the effects, as he alleged, of witchcraft. We 
know he was not bewitched, that is, that the cause of 
his trouble did not lay in any power or thing ex- 
ternal to himself ; it could never be real to another 
mind, but it was terribly real to him. To all intents 
and purposes he was bewitched even unto death. 

All that lies back of our conscious powers, all the 
not me, the pious soul calls God. And indeed how 
little we are in and of ourselves. Look at yonder wa- 



ter wheel doing its work. All the ?iot me in that case 
is the water that flows, and gravity that makes it flow, 
and without them the wheel is nothing. In our own 
case we draw quite as largely upon the universal, upon 
that which is not ourselves. Call all the not me God 
and we have some idea of the closeness and imminence 
of God to the old Hebrew prophet. Science shows 
all this not me to be impersonal force ; it shows how 
much of it is race, or family, or climate, or environ- 
ment, or physiology, or geology ; how the mind itself 
is a part of the body ; how the conscience itself arose, 
how the church, the state, and all institutions. A 
certain order of minds stamp this force with person- 
ality. All the early minds did, but science leads us 
farther and farther away from an anthropomorphic 
God. It is singular that we should have outgrown 
anthropomorphism so far as to deny personality to the 
separate forces of nature, but ascribe it to nature as a 


The view which the old theology takes is an arti- 
ficial view ; it imposes upon the world arbitrary and 
artificial conditions as if one were to paint the grass 
blue and the sky green. It says the world is a lost 
and condemned world, that God is estranged from the 
race of man, that through some act of disobedience of 
Adam six thousand or more years ago, sin and death 
entered the world, and that a way of escape from eter- 
nal ruin has been provided for mankind by the life 
and ignominious death of an innocent and just person, 
Jesus of Nazareth, etc. This I say is an artificial view, 
an utterly unscientific view, as much so as the belief 
not so very old that w'itches could cause storms and 
tempests, or as the view of Justyn Martyr that the 
earth becomes fertile when dug by a spade because the 
spade is in the form of a cross. 

Theology looks upon sin as something etirely apart 
from a man's natural defects, and upon religion as some- 
thing entirely independent of his good qualities: both 
are from without, one the work of a malignant spirit, 
the other the gift of a good spirit, but both arbitrary 
or mechanical, and in no way related to the ordinary 
course of nature. How different the natural or scien- 
tific view ! When we look upon the world with the 
eye of a philosopher we see that it is indeed the thea- 
tre of opposite and contending forces, but that the 
good, that is the good from the point of view of the 
best interest of the race, is slowly triumphing ; we 
see the race struggling up into a higher and better life 
the long, dark and devious route which man has come 
is disclosed, but his evolution has gone steadily for- 
ward. We do not find sin, in the theological sense, 
we see defects and imperfections, we see vice and 
disease, the ends of nature crossed and thwarted, but 
no more and no differently in the case of man than in 

the case of the animals and plants ; we see in fact, 
that death is everywhere the condition of lite. We 
do not find that the theological system takes hold of 
fact as reality at any point. It is a matter entirely 
extraneous, or apart from the laws and condition of 
things. There is no place for the scheme of redemp- 
tion. It looks just as artificial as the Ptolemaic sys- 
tem of astronomy. It is an invention of theology. On 
our maps we paint the different states and countries 
different colors and make the boundaries very promi- 
nent, but in nature we know these things are not thus 
differentiated. The different climates are not thus 
sharply separated ; neither are day and night divided 
by right lines. But our theology is as artificial as our 
maps or as our division of time. 

How easy to see that these systems have come 
down to us from an entirely different state of things, 
an entirely different condition of mind from that which 
prevails to day ; a state of mind which viewed all 
things externally, in an arbitrary and artificial light, 
which looked upon nature as the theatre of strife be- 
tween beneficent and malignant spirits, which saw 
Satanic agencies everywhere active, which saw all 
forces as supernatural forces, which begat a belief in 
magic, divination, alchemy, astrology, witchcraft, 
which believed an old woman could turn herself into 
a wolf and devour flocks of sheep, which looked upon 
an eclipse or a comet, not as a natural event, but as a 
supernatural. Nearly all these dark superstitions have 
perished ; the condition of mind that begat them has 
passed away, but the superstition of the magic of 
Christ's blood and all those pagan notions of heaven 
and hell, have survived ; but the intense realisation of 
them of the old days of witchcraft, is fast fading away. 
They are cooly held as intellectual propositions and 
that is about all. The light of science, where it is 
fully admitted is as fatal to them as sun to mildew. 
Science begets a habit of mind in which these artificial 
notions cannot live, just as the study of medicine be- 
gets quite a different theory of disease from that of the 
Indian practitioner. 

The study of nature kills all belief in miraculous 
or supernatural agents, not because it proves to us 
that these things do not exist, but because it fosters a 
habit of mind that is unfavorable to them, because it 
puts us in possession of a point of view from which 
they disappear. The opposite of the natural man is 
not the spiritual man, — for the natural man is often the 
most spiritual, — but the artificial man. The man upon 
whose mind has been foisted an artificial system of be- 
lief, a view of things, a view not encouraged by nature, 
but in opposition to nature. 

An artificial man, a man to whom all promptings 
of nature and suggestions of reason were looked upon 
as the whisperings of the evil one, — such was and still 



is the good old orthodox believer. He cherished an 
artificial system of belief, a system which attributed 
curious plans and devices to God outside of nature, 
to save fallen man — a system of belief, the most per- 
fect expression of which is found in the creed and 
elaborate ritual of the Catholic church. All the other 
churches are more or less compromises with nature, 
with the natural man. They concede some rights to 
him, the right of private judgment, the most precious 
of all ; but the Romish church concedes nothing ; it 
is the expression of absolute outward authority, it is 
as arbitrary and unnatural as anything can well be. 
It is the complete expression of a church, of a religious 
organisation, of a system of things which takes a man's 
salvation out of his own hands and puts it into the 
hands of an ecclesiastical hierarchy. At one extreme 
stands naturalism or science, at the other stands the 
Catholic church, while the other churches occupy in- 
termediate grounds. Indeed there is a regular gra- 
dation from Rome down or up, to nature, the Angli- 
can church probably standing nearest Rome, and the 
Unitarian nearest nature. 

I apprehend that the success of Christianity has 
not been owing to the fact that it is true as a system 
of doctrines, but that it is true as a system of ethics. 
It is a good working hypothesis. It restrains vice, it 
stimulates virtue. The doctrines are false, but they 
gave force, and, as it were, dramatic representation to 
the ethics ; they embodied it in living concrete form, 
as in a parable or allegory, so that they have a new 
power over men's hearts and minds. But always have 
the doctrines been held as primary, and the ethics as 
secondary, though the two were inseparable. The 
orthodox churches to-day set more store by the doc- 
trines, when the pinch comes, than by the ethics. It 
is more necessary to believe certain things, than to be 
a certain type of man, to lead a certain kind of life. 
The American Board of Foreign Missions, refuse cer- 
tain candidates for labor in the foreign field, who hold 
an extra belief in the extent of God's mercy to the 
heathen. If you believe in probation after death, says 
the board, you are none of ours, no matter what your 
daily walk and conversation may be. 

By making the object of religion some other world, 
some other state of existence than this, a great lever- 
age seems to have been gained. It gave room for the 
imagination to work, for the ideal to play a part. The 
enchantment of distance, the fascination of the un- 
known, the lure of the absolutely pure and perfect, 
(which of course would not satisfy us when attained 
any more than their opposite) have been great helps 
in elevating the race. The conscience of the race has 
slowly become attuned to these high promises and 

ideals. The present life is vulgar and mean, and to a 
large part of mankind seems hardly worth the having. 
The world of which we form a part is always more or 
less a prosy commonplace world, we are crushed and 
dwarfed by its materialism or its dull cares. Heaven 
must be some other world, some far away elysium 
field. This hope, this lure keeps the heart from fail- 
ing. That this " poor life is all," how such a convic- 
tion would cause millions of souls to sink back in the 
slough of despond ; because this life is poor to them, 
they have not the power to transform it and see it 
shot through with celestial laws. This earth is no star 
in the heavens to them, but a very vulgar and prosaic 



There was a great commotion in the school. Lit- 
tle Debby Smith of Bloomingdale had come out boldly 
denying the faith, and affirming a positive disbelief 
in the fairy god-mother and the little glass slipper. It 
was terrible. The whole neighborhood was scandal- 
ised ; but the primary department of the school felt 
that the very foundation of things was unsettled. Some 
went so far as to accuse Debby of denying the in- 
spiration and even the existence of a personal Cinder- 
ella. Lulu Weeks wrote on the blackboard of her 
class room, "Debby is a skizm "; but when asked by 
Debby to define what a "skizm" was, she couldn't 
do it. At recess things had come to such a pass that 
Kitty Brown told Debby to her face that what she had 
said was Heresy. This brought matters to a climax 
and at once four or five of the children cried out : 
"Heresy ! Heresy ! " 

Then Ada Martin said something ought to be done 
about it ; and eventually something was done. Ada, 
and Mary Booth, and Si Knapp hunted up Debby 
and fetched her out in the yard to answer concerning 
her false doctrine. At first Debby was not at all in- 
clined to answer, but preferred to go on eating her 
luncheon. Perhaps she would have gone on if it hadn't 
been that Willie Wickers pulled her lunch basket out 
of her lap and spilled her sandwich arid cake. At 
this Debby began to cry, and to claim that she was 
being persecuted. I am sure I do not know how it 
would have ended if Mabel Johnson had not offered 
her services as moderator. She proposed that Debby 
should be allowed to eat her lunch in peace, and that 
then all the children should hear what she had to say 
as to her belief or disbelief in Cinderella, and if found 
to be an infidel on the subject, none of them should 
play tag or puss in the corner any more with her. 
This course seemed wise and just to the children, be- 
cause, you see, it was about what the grown folks did. 
At all events poor Debby gathered up the fragments 



that remained of her luncheon, much the worse for 
dust, and with tears in her eyes sat down and fin- 
ished it. 

When the last mouthful was down Clara Hobbs 
asked Debby to define her position, so (as Clara for- 
cibly observed) that the children all might know 
whether she was a fit person to play puss with or 
tag. Poor Debby ! I pity her, don't you? And don't 
you think all right minded people ought? Of course 
it is a very solemn thing to have doubts concerning 
Cinderella, and yet (as some look at it) it is much 
more solemn having the doubts to deny them before 
children. Some have doubts, but go about proclaim- 
ing their beliefs on street corners, at recess to be seen 
of children, so as to "make themselves solid " with 
them, and most who do this achieve a fair business 
success at it. However let us get back to Debby. 
There she was up before the sanhedrim of the school 
required to define her position. This she now pro- 
ceeded to do. 

I believe (she said) in the plenary inspiration of 
Cinderella as a whole. I believe implicitly in a per- 
sonal Cinderella and in the personality of the wicked 
sisters. I am convinced that there was a prince, and 
I hold sacred the doctrines of the rats and the mice 
and the pumpkin ; but I deny most strenuously that 
there was any little glass slipper. 

At this, I tell you, there was an uproar. Some 
howled '■ Heresy " ! loud as they could. Some said 
they wouldn't play with Debby anymore, and some 
were for setting Willy Wicker's dog "Shep" on her. 
Happily better counsels prevailed, and all they did 
was to resort to "lip." There was plenty of this, 
such as it was. Kitty Brown enquired (wisely enough, 
as I look at it) how Debby could believe in the story 


deny that there was any little glass slipper at all. Kitty 
made some remarks "in this connection" which were 
very able, but which lack of space prevents my quot- 

Dora Jones said she thought great care should be 
taken lest injustice be done, and very earnestly be- 
sought Debby to reconsider her position. This Debby 
refused to do, she would not modify her expressed 
views even to the extent of admitting that, while there 
might flot have been a little slipper, that at least there 
was a slipper of some sort. No, Debby was firm. No 
slipper d'f any sort was her doctrine, and by that she 
proposed to stand. 

Whatever we may think of her doctrinal standards 
we all must admire her pluck. Don't you look at it 
that way ? 

Curious how many divergent, and some may say 
even discordant "views " were elicited as to the mean- 
ing of the story of Cinderella. I suppose now you 

will be glad to learn that my time is up, and therefore 
I am unable to give them all in full. Of course ulti- 
mately poor Debby was convicted of heresy, and now 
she wanders at recess and after school tagless and 
pussless, a sad warning to those who deny the truth 
as it is in Cinderella. As to what that truth really is 
few know anything ; but those few, happily for them- 
selves, know it all. I think Pollikins Roe, who is 
really a very bright little girl, put it better than the 
rest ; she said to me privately that as for herself she 
had no opinions on the subject ; that she thought the 
story of Cinderella was of no value except for the 
principles it contained ; and that it was quite beyond 
the capacity of any child or any number of children 
to decide how much truth there was //; the incidents. 

Minds are to each other as some power of their 
homologous conditions. To translate traditional be- 
liefs into intellectual equivalents, to render feeling in 
terms of tongue are tasks that children of all ages have 
tried their minds at. 

At this epoch, as I believe, never before, are faith's 
presumed foundations being broken up. What shall 
the righteous do? Godly men are changing churches, 
going out, or being put out of churches. Alas ! they 
change, they go for reasons as frivolous as those of 
the children in Bloomingdale school. 

Is it not absurd to adhere to the letter and ignore 
the spirit ? Is it not frivolous to have "views" as to 
the fairy prince, to "believe" in rats and mice and 
pumpkins, and yet to deny glass slippers ? to specu- 
late, and philosophise, and guess, whilst all the while 
the old steadfast truth has them in derision, and mocks 
when their fear cometh. 

The follies of our fathers, as well as the sins, have 
been visited upon us. Our minds are wounded. Let 
us heal them, — treating our brain hurts as surgeons do 
the flesh, binding them up with antiseptic solutions 
of principle against the spores of bigotry, the microbes 
of prejudice. These are in the atmosphere without 
and the blood within. 

Go to the National Gallery in London, and there 
look upon one of Turner's masterpieces — what do you 
see? — a blur, a blotch, a meaningless mass of paint 
without form and void. But as you move suddenly 
you are aware of a change. What was in you dark 
has become illumined. A step, — a glance, and lo ! 
you have justified to yourself the ways of Turner to 

Facts are figments ; steps towards or away from 
opportunities ; but the truth is in a vision, a focus, a 
vantage you share with none other. 

Outside of that focus there was no Turner ; within 
it you became one with him in art. He had revealed 

So look upon the marvellous landscape of nature ; 



the earth's beauty, the ever widening scenes of science, 
the inimitable vista before, the brief, imperfect past, 
not as if this were ail, but as knowing that there is a 
focus where the hand of the master may be visible. 

So also look upon the story of Christianity. Get 
your inspiration, not from Clio, but from Themis. 
Think no longer that the truth must rise or fall with 
the reasonableness or the folly of historical statements. 
The grandest of all truth is in a parable — a lie. Yet 
be sure, with the greater as the lesser story, with the 
Bible as with Cinderella, the merit is in you, and the 
sole merit any statement can have is in the principles 
it gives. 

Truth has ever needed a revelation. Euclid "re- 
vealed " geometry — Copernicus, Newton, Volta, Ba- 
con, — how glibly come the names of the great re- 

Religion is as truly a science as geometry ; but it 
is the science, — not of assumed facts of history, but 
of known relations of soul, — of the relations of the in- 
dividual to the eternal, of the differential to the Con- 
stant, of the concrete to the abstract, of the example 
to the principle, of man to God. 

You have the power within you to freely fix your 
own focus to see and know, — to take your inheritance 
of amorphous character and crj'stallise it, — make it, 
not indeed perfect, but isomeric with perfection. 



The Open Court has freely discussed the sexual na- 
ture and sexual relations as a necessity to a rational 
conception of the family or a scientific conception of 
society. But we have not yet reached an era when 
school books consider it essential to do the same thing. 
I have before me as good a school Physiology as f 
have ever seen " for the use of Grammar and Common 
schools." The author specifically avows his purpose 
to give our young people something rather more di- 
rectly practical than is usually found in school phys- 
iologies. "The book is intended for pupils from 
twelve to fifteen years of age ; " that is for those who 
are just reaching puberty and are involved in that 
terribly serious problem of chastity or debauchery. It 
is pre eminently the age when sexual matters must be 
understood, and the child wisely advised, or degenera- 
tion moral and physical will set in. Where shall such 
advice come from, or from what source shall the sim- 
ple fundamental laws of the scientific development 
and use of the body be looked for if not from a school 
physiology " intended for pupils from twelve to fif- 
teen." Yet you may read this book through without 
discovering that the author is aware of the existence 
of sexual organs or sexual characteristics. The sub- 
ject is not alluded to. Evidently Nature made the 

body so that a learned and moral physician considers 
it necessary to ignore parts of it in a supposed discus- 
sion of the whole. But the subject of alcoholic drinks 
has been treated with enlargement and emphasis. An 
appendix is added devoted to the more full elucidation 
of the question of temperance and abstinence. Every 
wise educator as well as observant citizen compre- 
hends that excess in the use of stimulants as well as 
the use of narcotics is owing very largely to the ante- 
dating abuse of the nervous organism and to devital- 
ised conditions caused by sex abuse. Our text-books 
are fighting a symptom and not the disease when they 
belabor alcohol. What our physiologies ought to do 
is to teach the wise use of every organ of the body ; 
and supremely of such organs as involve life or death, 
regeneration or degeneration, vital vigor or a prostra- 
tion of the whole nervous system, and an appeal to 
stimulants, that ultimate in worse wreckage. 

I am delighted when I read the chapter on "The 
Nervous System " to find so discriminating and yet 
thorough a discussion of the government of thought 
sensation motion by these filaments. "The nervous 
system in a man may be compared to the general of 
an army." Nerves and nerve cells it clearly is needful 
that the boy of twelve should understand. Our author 
begins at the brain and carefully unfolds the truth as 
he creeps along down the spinal cord. Excellent laws 
of diet and sleep and hygiene are laid down ; but that 
the boy is a boy and the girl a girl, with specific sexual 
powers embodied in the nerve organism, and involv- 
ing more of misery or joy than accrues individually 
and socially from any other source is not directly or indi- 
rectly referred to. I understand that this is not the fault 
of this author alone. It is the custom of our school 
books and schools. The custom is based on a much 
more general habit covering our family life. It is con- 
ceived to be indelicate to discuss a certain part of the 
functions with which Nature has endowed us. If we 
could insure absolute ignorance on the sexual question 
until puberty the mistake would not be so gross. But 
we know very well that any omission of this sort on 
our part is amply filled up by false and vicious infor- 
mation gathered freely in the common intercourse of 
of our school system. That is while we decline to 
teach science, nescience and lies are inculcated. Not 
one child in one thousand in the United States reaches 
twelve years of age without prominent and very dan- 
gerous , views, if not habits, involving the sexual or- 
gans, and the whole nervous system. Society is un- 
dermined by the consequences of this combination of 
knowledge and ignorance. Wrecks not only fill our 
idiot and insane asylums, but others drag on as devital- 
ised fragments of our social organism. Wives and 
husbands stumble ahead with broken health and beget 
distracted children. The possible improvement of the 



human race as well as the amelioration of nervous 
disorders depends on right knowledge being substi- 
tuted for false knowledge at the outset. 

While our whole common school curriculum needs 
readjustment to modern acquisitions of knowledge, it 
is peculiarly needful that our physiological teaching 
tell the primary truths of our whole organism, and not 
of part of it only. It is a mistake to suppose any such 
omission is required in order to secure chastity. The 
subject can be discussed if discussed in due time. 
But it is all important that so far as the truth is told, 
it be the truth without prevarication or exaggeration. 
We do not want a chapter of perfervid morals in place 
of science. Exactly that is what we are getting of 
late in the discussion of alcohol, a passionate tirade 
against stimulants. Several physiologies now in use 
in the United States are by statute teaching what is 
supposed to be temperance. I am a total abstainer 
myself ; but I will not allow my children to consider 
such rant as knowledge. I see no reason for the 
cowardice that tries to ensure the young from vice by 
forestalling exaggerations and biased statements, if 
not absolute falsehood. The simplest straightforward- 
ness is always surest and safest as it is most scientific. 

I sympathise with Mr. Huxley somewhat in his 
pessimistic views as to the possibility of engrafting 
science teaching upon any school system now existing. 
It is quite as difficult here as in England. The inca- 
pacity of the average teacher is supplemented by the 
conglomerate nature of the average text-book. By 
far the larger part of our science text-books are gotten 
up to order by professional text-book makers. These 
men. will as soon prepare you a chemistry as a geog- 
raphy ; or a zoology as quickly as a botany. I am 
bound to say their work is equally valuable in all di- 
rections. That which is inserted is as astounding as 
that which is omitted. The interference of State Leg- 
islatures has been well intended but has secured some 
queer results. Professor Cope in the January Nat- 
uralist calls attention to the condition of affairs in In- 
diana. Every teacher is compelled to attend State 
Institutes and discuss certain topics assigned for the 
occasion. This year the study is botany; and here is 
how the work is perfected. In January the flower and 
fruit of the strawberry is the subject ; the topic for 
November is the dog-tooth violet ; for December tu- 
lips. Any one who understands the fundamental 
principle of science teaching knows it is the study of 
things, and not of books. But here there is no thought 
of botany as anything but book study. The dog tooth 
violet blossoms in April and tulips in May. Still it 
must be seen that there is a general consciousness that 
what we need in our schools is science. The struggle 
of legislators is promising. The evolution will be- 
come a rational fact in due time. Sins of omission as 

well as commission will be exorcised. I do not doubt 
but that we shall shortly have a physiology that is 
aware that nature did not make a mistake in making 
us male and female. 


SciciAL reformers and the enthusiastic prophets of 
a new mankind tell us that when their dreams are 
realised a radical change will take place in the nature 
of man. The coming man will lose all the vicious 
features" of the present man ; universal happiness will 
reign all the world over and humanity will become a 
homogeneous mass either of independent sovereigns 
or of well adapted members of society. The former 
extreme is called anarchism, the latter socialism or 
nationalism ; and the exponents of either view expect 
from the application of their panacea a cure for all so- 
cial diseases and the institution of a millennium upon 

How vain are the endeavors to construct an ideal 
Utopia either of an individualistic or socialistic hu- 
manity ! Does it not prove that sociology is still in 
its infancy? Instead of studying facts, we invent and 
propose schemes. 

The mistake made by anarchists as well as by so- 
cialists is that individualism and socialism are treated 
as regulative principles while in reality they are not 
principles ; they are the two factors of society. Neither 
of them can be made its sole principle of regulation. 
You might as well propose to regulate gravity on earth 
by making either the centrifugal or the centripetal 
force the supreme and only law, abolishing the one 
for the benefit of the other. 

Individualism and socialism are factors and cannot 
be made principles. This means : Individualism is 
the natural aspiration of every being to be itself, it is 
the inborn tendency of every creature to grow and de- 
velop in agreement with its own nature. We might 
say that this endeavor is right, but it is more correct 
to say that it is a fact ; it is natural and we can as 
little abolish it as we can decree by an act of legisla- 
ture that fire shall cease to burn or that water shall 
cease to quench fire. Socialism on the other hand is a 
fact also. " I " am not alone in the world ; there are my 
neighbors and my life is intimately interwoven with 
their lives. My helpfulness to them and their help- 
fulness to me constitute the properly human element 
of my soul and are perhaps ninety-nine one hundredths 
of my whole self. The more human society progresses, 
the more numerous and varied become the relations 
among the members of society, and the truth dawns 
upon us that no advantage accrues to an individual 
by the suppression of the individuality of his fellows. 
First he, in so doing, never succeeds for good, and 
secondly the mutual advantage will in the end always 



be greater to all concerned the more the factor of in- 
dividualism in others remains respected. Human 
society as it naturally grows is the result of both 
factors, of individualism and of socialism. 

The anarchist proposes to make individualism, and 
the nationalist to make socialism the main principle 
of regulation for society. Are not these one-eyed re- 
formers utterly in the dark as to the nature of the so- 
cial problem ? The social problem demands an inquiry 
into the natural laws of the social growth in order to 
do voluntarily what according to the laws of nature 
must after all be the final outcome of evolution. By 
consciously and methodically adapting ourselves to 
the laws of nature, we shall save much waste, avoid 
great pains, and acquire the noble satisfaction that we 
have built upon a rock : and no innovation is possible 
except it be a gradual evolution from the present state 
and the result of the factors which are at present active. 

Socialism and anarchism are the two extremes, and 
all social parties contain both principles in different 
proportions. The republicans and the democrats rep- 
resent the same opposition of centripetal and centri- 
fugal forces in their politics. Party platforms are ex- 
ponents of the forces that manifest themselves in the 
growth of society. They may be either symptoms of 
special diseases or indicators of a wholesome reaction 
against special diseases. A movement may be needed 
now in the direction of anarchism and now in that of 
socialism. We may now want a regulation of certain 
affairs in which the public safety and interest are con- 
cerned : for instance, in giving licenses to physicians 
and druggists, in the supervision of banks, in rail- 
road matters, etc., etc.; and then again we may want 
a greater freedom from government interference. The 
temporary needs as they are more or less felt will swell 
the one or the other party. 

It would be a misfortune, however, if one of these 
partisan forces could rush to the extreme and realise 
the social or anarchical ideal before its opposite had 
been deeply rooted at the same time in the hearts of 
the people. Social institutions not based upon liberty, 
or government interference to the suppression of free 
competition, would be exactly as insupportable as an- 
archy among lawless people who have no regard for 
the rights of others. But there is no danger that either 
extreme would entirely disappear to leave the whole 
field to the other alone. The law of inertia holds good 
in the psychical and sociological world no less than in 
the physical. 

As the present man is the man of the past only 
further developed, so the coming man will be the 
present man only wiser, nobler, purer. There is no 
chance for a radical change of the nature of man or of 
the constitution of society. However there is a chance 
and more than a chance, there is a fully justified 

hope and a rational faith that man will continue to 
progress. Nature's cruel work of incessantly lopping 
off the constantly new appearing vicious outgrowths 
of human life through the survival of the fittest, and 
by an extirpation of the unfit, will in the future be 
performed by man himself, from the start, as soon as 
he has discovered the conditions under which these 
outgrowths become impossible. 

Human society will in the future be more anar- 
chistic in the same measure as it will be more social- 
istic. Not that socialistic institutions or laws will 
through an external pressure abolish competition and 
impose upon the individual more socialistic relations ; 
nor that the abolition of laws will restrict government 
interference so as to give more elbow-room to individ- 
ual liberty. Individual liberty will increase at the 
same ratio as the social instincts of mutual justice 
will become more than at present a part of every in- 
dividual man. This has been the law of social pro 
gress in the past, it has made the republican institu- 
tions of the present possible and this law will hold 
good for the future also. Anarchism could be real- 
ised only where the laws of justice were inscribed in 
the hearts of all men, so that every man were a law 
unto himself ; and perfect socialism can be realised 
only where every individual's greatest joy consisted 
in the ambition to serve the community. The former 
would be a state of altruistic individualists and the 
latter one of individualistic altruists. Both states are 
ideals and both are represented by more or less con- 
sistent parties which for the attainment of the same 
aim propose opposite means. These parties are 
exponents of certain forces that manifest themselves 
in the growth of society. It is well to understand 
both ideals and to sympathise with both, although the 
one as much as the other may be equally impossible, 
for evolution is a constant and a simultaneous approx- 
imation to both ideals. p. c. 


It seems that the " lost cause " has fallen under the humili- 
atiag patronage of Lord Wolseley, a general in the British army, 
" England's only general " they call him over there, a compliment 
which if well deserved bodes ill for England. His Lordship, fresh 
from the battle fields of Hyde Park and Wimbledon, is earning an 
honest penny by writing for the magazines a platitudinous and 
second hand review of the American civil war. Lord Wolseley is 
a confederate partisan who has not yet learned " that the war is 
over, " and he takes revenge on the union soldiers by petulantly 
telling them that they really ought not to have won it you know, 
after he had prophesied that they must fail. By the way. his 
Lordship is one of the wisest of those military soothsayers who 
prophesy portentously after the event. If a battle was won by 
haste, he can show that haste was wise, if lost, that rashness was 
to blame. Lord Wolseley's essays are merely wrappers for dyna- 
mite cartridges by which he hopes to shatter the reputation of the 
union army. In a recent article on General Sherman, Lord 
Wolseley produces from the cellar of mouldy fables that faded 


picture of the confederate "victors in a hundred fights against 
vastly superior numbers," and that other bit of maudlin gloom 
which represents the surrender at Appomatox, when " Lee's gal- 
lant but starving army, hungry and without resources, but not 
beaten in battle, laid down their arms." 

It does not appear at all strange to Lord Wolseley, who has 
never yet commanded in actual war, — for he will hardly dignify 
by that name the conquest of a few Egyptian savages ; — it does 
not appear at all paradoxical to him, that the " victors in a hundred 
fights," should foolishly surrender to the vanquished in a hundred 
fights ; but men who have seen war in reality will think such a 
phenomenon impossible to be. Lord Wolseley is almost piously 
sentimental concerning the " sincere patriots" of the South, and 
yet he pretends that they were always confronted by " vastly su- 
perior numbers " How came that ? It is the boast of confederate 
partisans like Lord Wolseley that the South was unanimous in 
sentiment, and that her valor was only equalled by the devotion of 
her sons, who left everything behind them, and rallied round their 
flag. Then those very same historians immediately try to prove 
that very few of the said sons went into actual fight. Lord Wolse- 
ley cannot be allowed the double boast that thousands sought the 
battle but that only hundreds fought it. Equally inconsistent is 
his claim that the confederates were starved in a country that sup- 
ported the union troops luxuriously when they marched over it. 
The confederate soldiers will not thank Lord Wolseley for his 
patronage. To tell brave men that their conquerors were cowards 
is flattery in reverse. Our theatre of war was too vast for the 
military comprehension of Lord Wolseley, but he is fairly com- 
petent to give us a critical review of the Easter Monday sham 
Battle of Brighton, or perhaps to show us how the disastrous 
Battle of Dorking was lost through the fussy incompetence' of the 
Horse Guards. 

I see that the old Vikings of the north have some descendants 
living yet. One of them by the name of Peary, an American Lieu- 
tenant, has taken a little ship and started northward for the con- 
quest of the pole. This is a more praiseworthy expedition than 
some of the piratical excursions of his ancestors, the old sea kings ; 
but a wail of gloomy portent comes from portions of the American 
press, pitying the foolhardy enterprise and the rash navigator who 
dares to tempt the fate of Hendrik Hudson, of Sir John Franklin, 
and DeLong. Out of the depths of their fear they exclaim, "Why 
does not the American government put a stop to those Arctic ex- 
peditions, which inflict hardship, impose danger, and imperil 
human lives in a search for something which it is not possible to 
find ; and which if it could be found' would have no money value ? " 
These questions come out of the timid and mercantile elements of 
our souls, and they regard not the importance of even unprofitable 
courage in the formation of national character. The Anglo-Saxon 
trait of conquering difficulties for the glory of conquering them is 
intensified m the American. It has given to him that individuality 
and self reliance which have made him invincible by the wild 
beast or the wild man. Led, often by the spirit of adventure alone, 
he has blaze 1 with his axe a path for empire across the continent 
from sea to sea. Danger was the very spice of life to the American 
pioneer, and to him adventure was a stimulant like wine. Under 
its influence he has explored the continent, torn out the heart of 
the mountains for their silver, and turned the rivers into new 
channels to get the gold hidden in the sand. Strengthened by it 
he has chased the sperm whale nearly to the pole, and inspired by 
the charm and fascination of it, he will not stop until he has planted 
his flag at the very pole itself. 

There seems to be an epidemic of heresy abroad in the land, 
and the Newtons and McQuearys and the Briggses and the Brookses 

think that they can cure it by inoculating the churches with it, as 
if it were a matter of small pox to be prevented by the injection of 
some virus. It resembles a panic in the army ; the fight gets hot 
and one or two drop out, perhaps limping, then some others follow, 
and then more, until at last the magnetism of alarm makes a stam- 
pede all along the line. Much of it is due to pretentious phrase- 
ology such as "advanced thought," " modern learning," "higher 
criticism," " exegetical acumen," whatever that is, and other fash- 
ionable phrases of like dignity. Men are willing to be accused of 
intellectuality or of a taste for higher criticism, and a church trial 
often gives them the notoriety they seek. Some of the heresy is 
due to a growing disbelief in punishment, especially Divine pun- 
ishment of the eternal kind. This feeling was eloquently expressed 
by an American delegate to a Presbyterian convention in London 
when he was pleading for a revision of the creed. He said ; "I 
don't know how it may be with you Englishmen, but the American 
people will not submit to eternal punishment. It's no us preach- 
ing it. I tell you they won't stand it." If the stampede continues 
at the present rate of travel for a few years more, the rival powers 
will change places, and we shall see men tried for orthodoxy be- 
fore ecclesiastical tribunals, and condemned. M. M. Trumbull. 


BY F. J. P. 

Once in tte college years gone by, I read 

In Hesiod of the young Earth's Age of Gold : 
When men, who tired of life, did but enfold 

Their eyes from light with their o\vn cloaks, and fled 

Silent and painless, homewards to the Dead. 
Boy though I was, the legend took firm hold 
Upon my soul ; for could I not behold 

Ev'n then how Grief to Joy is alway wed ? 

How Life is vex't with cares, with sin, disease ? 
How high resolves and prayers are turned to dust ? 
And how — there lay the charm ! — how sweet it must 

Have been to die in such soft quiet ease ? 

But since those days the world seems changed to me : 

Duty reveals what then I scarce could see. 




$2.00 PER YEAR. $1.00 FOR SIX MONTHS. 


All communications should be addressed to 

(Nixon Building, 17s La Salle Street,) 


roughs 285 1 

THE LITTLE GLASS SLIPPER. Hudor Genone.... 2853 

SCIENCE TEXT BOOKS. E. P. Powell 2855 


CURRENT TOPICS. Lord Wolseley as a Critic. Search- 
ing for the Pole. The Epidemic of Heresy. Gen. M. 

M. Trumbull 2857 

POETRY 28s8 

C r r 


The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion -with Science. 

No. 20I. (Vol. V.-19 ) 

CHICAGO, JULY 2, 1891. 

[ Two Dollars per Yea 
I Single Copies, 5 Cts. 



The first suggestion of American Independence 
was made in England. In the London Chronicle, Oct. 
25, 1774, an elaborate article appeared entitled "Amer- 
ican Independence the Interest and Glory of Great 
Britain." It was reprinted in the Pennsylvania Journal, 
but there was no response. Attachment to the mother 
country survived the tea-riots of that year, and in 
March 1775 Franklin informed Lord Chatham that he 
had never heard an opinion looking towards inde- 
pendence from any American "drunk or sober." But 
the "massacre at Lexington," as the first collision 
(April 19, 1775) was called, moved the country to in- 
dignation. It was an illustration of how great a matter 
a little fire kindleth. A few villagers under Captain 
Parker (grandfather of Theodore Parker, who kept 
the Captain's musket on his wall) met the English 
troops. Parker had warned them not to fire unless 
fired on, but one could not restrain himself : his gun 
missed fire but the flash brought a volley from the 
Englishmen, and independence was potentially written 
in the blood of the seven men who were left dead in 
Lexington. A few days after the tidings reached Phil- 
adelphia appeared the April number of the Pennsyl- 
vania Magazine, edited by Thomas Paine. It contained 
a summary of Chatham's speech, in which he said the 
Crown would lose its lustre if " robbed of so principal 
a jewel as America." Paine adds this footnote: "The 
principal jewel of the Crown actually dropped out at 
the coronation." This little footnote was probably 
the nearest approach to a suggestion of independence 
made by any American even then. And among all the 
fiery meetings held throughout the colonies only one 
ventured to utter the word independence. From the 
county of Mecklenburg, North Carolina, came resolu- 
tions passed May 31 and June 10, 1775, demanding the 
organisation of an independent government. Congress 
would not allow such treasonable resolutions to be read 
before it, and the written records were lost. Jefferson 
pronounced the Mecklenburg resolutions mythical. 
But lately a copy of the South Carolina Gazette of June 
13, 1775, has been discovered containing the resolu- 
tions : it is in Charleston, and I have seen a photo- 
graphed copy. 

The first argument for independence, from the 
American point of view, was from the pen of Thomas 
Paine. It was printed in the Pennsylvania Journal, 
Oct. 18, 1775, under the title "A Serious Thought," 
and over the signature "Humanus." It presents a 
series of charges against Great Britain, somewhat re- 
sembling those of the "Declaration," and concludes : 
"When I reflect on these, I hesitate not for a moment 
to believe that the Almighty will finally separate Amer- 
ica from Britain, — call it Independency or what you 
will, if it is the cause of God and humanity it will go 
on." The king is especially arraigned for establishing 
African slavery in America, which independence will 
abolish. Paine's phraseology leaves little doubt that' he 
wrote the anti-slavery passage in the Declaration which 
was struck out. While writing Common Sense which 
really determined the matter, Paine was suspected of 
being a British spy. Nor was it so absurd, for up to 
the " massacre of Lexington " he had been active in 
conciliation. He was disgusted at the prospective out- 
break, and wrote to Franklin : "I thought it very hard 
to have the country set on fire about my ears almost 
the mornent I got into it." Common Sense appeared 
January 10, 1776. Washington pronounced it "un- 
answerable" (to Joseph Reed, Jan. 31), and indeed 
there was not a leading patriot in the country who did 
not applaud. New York had instructed its congress- 
men not to vote for independence, but one of its dele- 
gates, Henry Wisner, sent its leading assemblymen 
this pamphlet, asking their answer : as they could not 
give any Wisner disregarded their instructions, and 
the State had to come round to him. At that time 
many ascribed the pamphlet to Franklin, who was one 
day reproached by a lady for the expression "royal 
brute of Great Britain." Franklin assured her that 
he was not the author, and would never have so dis- 
honored the brute creation. 

"A little thing sometimes produces a great effect," 
wrote Cobbett from America to Lord Grenville. "It 
appears to me very clear that some beastly insults of- 
fered to Mr. Paine while he was in the Excise in Eng- 
land was the real cause of the revolution in America." 
This is more epigrammatic than exact. Paine was 
turned out of the Excise for absenting himself from 
his post (Lewes) without leave. It was not fair, for 
he had been engaged by the Excisemen of England to 



try and get a bill through Parliament raising their 
salaries, and had to be much in London ; and no other 
fault was charged. There were no insults, but he 
he was left penniless, and Franklin advised his coming 
to America. Here he at once got a good position, and 
was editing the only important magazine of the coun- 
try, without any animosity to England. However, 
Cobbett is right when he further says that whoever 
may have written the "Declaration," Paine was its 
author. At that time Philadelphia was full of so-called 
"tories." Their chief nest was the University, pre- 
sided over by Rev. WiUiam Smith, D. D., who, as 
" Cato " attacked " Common Sense. " Paine replied 
under the name "Forrester," and President Smith 
was so worsted that he lost his position, and left Phil- 
adelphia for a small curacy in Marj'land. Paine re- 
sided in a room opposite the chief meeting-house of 
the Quakers, who, under pretext of peace-principles 
aided the enemy. "Common Sense" insisted that 
they should address their testimony against war to the 
invaders equally with the invaded, and as they were 
not ready to do this their influence was destroyed. The 
danger to independence now lay in the approach of 
peace commissioners from England. Paine issued a 
little pamphlet entitled "Dialogue between the Ghost 
of General Montgomery, just arrived from the Elysian 
Fields, and an American Delegate." The gallant 
Ghost warns the Delegate that union with England is 
impossible, and, were it otherwise, would be a wrong 
to the English as well as the American people. This 
pamphlet was effective in strengthening waverers. 

On June 7, 1775, Hon. Richard Henry Lee sub- 
mitted to Congress a resolution that the colonies are 
and ought to be independent. A committee was ap- 
pointed to propose appropriate action, and reported 
June 28th through Benjamin Harrison, great-grand- 
father of the present President. It was found that 
six states hesitated — New York, New Jersey, Penn- 
sylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and South Carolina. 
Congress postponed the matter until July i, meantime 
appointing a committee to draft a Declaration, another 
to organise a Confederation, and a third to obtain 
foreign aid. The committee on a Declaration (Jefferson, 
John Adams, Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. 
Livingston reported on July 2. A bare majority in Con- 
gress passed the Declaration on July 4. Congress then 
adjourned to July 15, in order that efforts might be 
made to induce New York and Maryland to withdraw 
their restrictions on their delegates, who were per- 
sonally favorable to independence. On July 15 all were 
free and unanimous. On the 19th Congress ordered 
the Declaration to be engrossed, and signed by every 
member. The paper had been signed on July 4 only 
by John Hancock, president of Congress, and the 
secretary Charles Thomson. The engrossed copy was 

produced August 2 and signed by the members, some 
signatures being added later. The first to sign was 
Josiah Bartlett of New Hampshire, and the last Mat- 
thew Thornton of the same colony, when he took his 
seat November 4. In Trumbull's picture of the " sign- 
ing," in the Capital, more pomp is given to the affair 
than accompanied it. The secretary was so little im- 
pressed that his entry that the members signed is 
written on the margin of the journal of Congess. 
Thomas Stone of Maryland, who signed, is not in 
Trumbull's picture, and Robert Livingston who did 
not sign, being absent, is put in. 

The earliest draft of the Declaration, before the 
anti-slavery paragraphs were struck out, is in the Li- 
brary of the State Department ; the draft agreed to by 
the Committee and passed by Congress is lost ; the 
engrossed Declaration is in Independence Hall, Phila- 

A complete collection of autographs of the "sign- 
ers " is a fortune. There are only three in existence. 
One of these belongs to Dr. Thomas Addis Emmet of 
New York. The costliness of the autographs is in the 
ratio of the obscurity of the signers. One of the least 
distinguished signers was Thomas Lynch Jr. of South 
Carolina. Only three examples of his writing are 
known, uninteresting business notes, and for one of 
them Dr. Emmet paid over §5000. 

The signers of the Declaration were rich men, and 
all of the "gentry." The British government were 
probably deceived by their adopting as their spokes- 
man, and making Secretary of Foreign Affairs, the 
humble exciseman Paine. The first president of Con- 
gress, Peyton Randolph, and George Washington, 
would pretty certainly have been knighted but for the 
revolution. The espousal of American independence 
by such men, and by the Adams family, the Living- 
stons, the Stones of Maryland, meant that the most 
loyal and conservative class had gone against the king, 
and that America was irrecoverably lost to him. A 
well-informed English Ministry would have spared 
themselves and us the seven years war. 

Paine did not use only his pen in the revolution. 
When the cause had been consecrated to independ- 
ence he shouldered his musket, marched to the front, 
did such service (at Fort Lee) that Gen. Greene took 
him on his staff, shared the hardships of Washington's 
retreat to the Delaware, and wrote by camp-fires his 
" Crisis " which Washington ordered to be read to his 
depressed soldiers. The first sentence of that " Crisis," 
"These are the times that try men's souls," was the 
watchword at Trenton, where Paine helped to capture 
the Hessians. He afterwards went in an open boat, 
under fire of the English ships, to convey an order 
to those besieged in Fort MifHin, and on other occa- 
sions proved his courage. He visited France, and 



brought back six million livres. But his services 
were forgotten when he extended his detestation of 
oppression and cruelty to heavenly as well as earthly 



The relation of criminality to the other forms of 
pathological and abnormal humanity is one of degree. 
If we represent the highest degree, as crime, by A'^, 
A^, say, would stand for insane criminality, and A* 
for alcoholism perhaps, A^ for pauperism, A- for those 
weak forms of humanity that charity treats more es- 
pecially, and A for the idea of wrong in general, par- 
ticularly in its lightest forms. Thus, crime is the most 
exaggerated form of wrong ; but these forms are all 
one in essence. A drop of water is as much water, as 
is an ocean. 

It is difficult to draw a distinct line between these 
different forms of wrong. This will become evident 
from the fact that they are dovetailed one into the 
other. Thus, when cross-questioning criminals, one 
often feels that not only are their minds weak and 
wavering but that they border close on insanity. The 
same feeling arises after an examination of confirmed 
paupers. Here alcoholism is one of the main causes ; 
The individual, on account of his intemperate habits, 
finds difficulty in obtaining employment : and this 
forced idleness, gradually, from repetition, develops 
into a confirmed habit. Pauperism may be, in some 
cases, hereditary, but it is too often overlooked that 
the children of paupers can acquire all such habits 
from their parents, and so it can be carried from one 
generation to another, without resorting to heredity 
as a cause, which is too often a name to cover up our 
ignorance of all the early conditions. The extent to 
which alcoholism is involved in all forms of humani- 
tarian pathology is well known ; it is often indirectly 
as well as directlj' the cause of leading the young into 
crime; the intemperate father makes himself a pest in 
his own home ; the children remain out all night 
through fear ; this habit leads to running away for a 
longer time; although not thieves, the children are 
compelled to steal, or to beg, in order to live ; and 
thus many become confirmed criminals or paupers, or 
both. The great evil about alcoholism is that it too 
often injures those around, who are of much more 
value than the alcoholic himself. It makes itself felt 
indirectly and directly in our hospitals, insane asy- 
lums, orphan asylums, and charitable institutions in 
general. However low the trade of the prostitute may 
be, alcohol is her greatest physical enemy. 

As just indicated, some of the lesser degrees of ab- 
normal and pathological humanity may be considered 
under the head of charitological. These are repre- 

sented by the different kinds of benevolent institu- 
tions, such as asylums for the insane, and feeble- 
minded, for the inebriate : hospitals, homes for the 
deaf, dumb and blind : for the aged and orphans, etc., 
and institutions for defectives of whatever nature. 

It is evident, however, that the term charitolog- 
ical may not only be applied to what is pathological 
or abnormal but also to that which is physiological or 
normal. Thus it can refer to institutions of quite a 
different order, but yet none the less charitable in na- 
ture. We refer of course to educational institutions, 
the majority of which are a gift to the public, and es- 
pecially to those who attend them. It is obvious 
enough that every student is, in some measure, a 
charity student, from the well known fact that the 
tuition money iii most cases pays a very small part of 
the expenses. 

Now, no distinct line can be drawn between penal 
an(l reformatory institutions, and between reformatory 
and^ educational institutions; it is, again, a question 
of degree. But in saying this, it is not meant that 
difference in degree is of little consequence. On the 
contrary it is very important to distinguish between 
penal, reformatory and educational, for practical rea- 
sons, as in the classification of prisoners, not all of 
whom are criminals. In a sense, all education should 
be reformatory. 

But it may be asked, where can a subject end. It 
goes without saying, that divisions are more or less 
arbitrary, if we are seeking reality, for things are to- 
gether, and the more we look into the world, the more 
we find it to be an organic tnechanism of absolute rela- 
tivity. Most human beings who are abnormal or de- 
fective in any way, are much more alike, than unlike 
normal individuals : and hence, in the thorough study 
of any single individual (microcosmic mechanism), 
distinct lines are more for convenience. Thus the 
difficulties of distinguishing between health and dis- 
ease, sanity and insanity, vegetable and animal, are 
familiar. Whatever may be said from the educational 
point of view about abnormal cases, is generally true, 
with few modifications, of the normal. Education and 
pedagogy are thus to be included to some extent in a 
comprehensive charitological system. 

But although the distinct separation of one wrong 
from another is not easy, yet the decision as to the 
highest form of wrong may not be so difficult. This 
form consists without doubt, in the act of depriving 
another of his existence ; no act c»uld be more rad- 
ical ; the least that could be said of any one is that he 
does not exist. The desire for existence is the deep- 
est instinct in nature ; not only in the lower forms of 
nature, but anthropologically considered, this feeling 
manifests itself in the highest aspirations of races. In 
mythology, religion and theology, the great fact is ex- 



istence hereafter, and in philosophy, it has gone so far 
as pre- existence of the soul. Perhaps the deepest ex- 
perience we have of non-existence, is in the loss of an 
intimate friend, when we say so truly, that part of our 
existence has gone from us. It is death which makes 
existence tragic. 

Now the degrees of wrong may be expressed in a 
general way, in terms of existence. That is, in de- 
priving another of any of his rights, we are taking 
from him some of his existence ; for existence is qual- 
itative, as well as temporal; that is, it includes every- 
thing, that gives to life content. 

Thus, in this sense, a man of forty may have had 
more existence, than another at eighty, where the for- 
mer's life has been broader richer in experience and 
thought, and more valuable to others. 

We may say in general that the existence of a per- 
son is beneficial or injurious, in that degree, in which 
it is beneficial or injurious to the community or hu- 
manity. This statement is based upon the truism, 
that the whole is more than any of its parts. 

The degrees of wrong, therefore, should depend upon 
the degree of danger or injury {inoral, intellectual, phys- 
ical, or financial^ which a thought, feeling, willing or 
action, brings to the community. 

This same principle should be applied to degrees 
of exaggerated wrong or crime. 

But, it may be said, should not the degree of free- 
dom or of personal guilt, be the main basis for the 
punishment of the criminal ? The force of this ob- 
jection is evident ; historically, the idea of freedom 
has been the basis of criminal law ; it has also been 
sanctioned by the experience of the race ; and although 
no claim is made of carrying it into practice without 
serious difficulties, in the way of strict justice, (diffi- 
culties inevitable to any system,) yet, it has not only 
been an invaluable service, but a necessity to human- 
ity. This is not only true in criminal lines but this 
idea has been the conscious basis of our highest moral 

But at the same time, it must be admitted, that 
the exaggeration of the idea of freedom has been one 
of the main causes of vengeance, which has left its 
traces in blood, fire, martyrdom and dungeon. And 
though at present, vengeance seldom takes such ex- 
treme forms, yet it is far from extinct. On moral and 
on biblical grounds, as far as human beings are con- 
cerned, vengeance can find little support ; an example 
of its impracticabSity is the fact, that some of the 
best prison wardens never punish a man till sometime 
after the offense, so that there may be no feeling on 
the part of either, that it is an expression of vengeance. 
The offender is generally reasoned with kindly, but 
firmly, and told that he must be punished, otherwise 
the good discipline of the prison could not be main- 

tained ; which means, that he is punished for the good 
of others. With few exceptions, a revengeful tone or 
manner towards the prisoner (same outside of prison) 
always does harm, for it stirs up similar feelings in 
the prisoner, which are often the cause of his bad be- 
havior and crime, and need no development. Kind- 
ness with firmness, is the desirable combination. Ven- 
geance produces vengeance. 

But, taking the deterministic view of the world, the 
highest morality is possible. One proof is that some 
fatalists are rigidly moral. A psychological analysis 
will show that persons who are loved and esteemed, 
are those whose very nature is to do good, — that is, 
they would not, and could not see a fellow-being suf- 
fer ; that is, from the necessity of their nature they 
were from infancy of a kind disposition. We admire 
the sturdy nature, who, by long struggle, has reached 
the moral goal; but we cannot love him always. He 
is not always of a kind disposition : this is not a ne- 
cessity of his nature. As the expression goes, "There 
are very good people with whom the Lord himself 
could not live." 

Is it not the spontaneity of a kind act that gives it 
its beauty ? Where there is no calculating, no reason- 
ing, no weighing in the balance, no choice ? The 
grace of morality is in its naturalness. But to go still 
further : do we like a good apple more, and a bad 
apple less, because they are necessarily good or bad ? 
and. if we admitted that every thought, feeling willing 
and acting of men were as necessary as the law of 
gravity, would we like honest men less and liars more? 
True, we might at first modify our estimation of some 
men, but it would be in the direction of better feeling 
towards all men. 

Bur, whatever one's personal convictions may be, 
questions of the freedom of the will and the like must 
be set aside, not because they are not important, but 
simply because enough is not known regarding the ex- 
act conditions (psychological and physiological) under 
which we act and think. If we were obliged to with- 
hold action, in the case of any criminal, for the reason 
that we do not know whether the will is free or not, 
(allowing for all misconceptions as to this whole ques- 
tion) the community would be wholly unprotected. If 
a tiger were loose in the streets, the first question would 
not be whether he was guilty or not. We should im- 
prison the criminal, first of all, because he is dangerous 
to the community. 

But if it be asked, how there can be responsibility 
without freedom, the answer is, that there is at least 
the feeling of responsibility in cases where there is 
little or no freedom ; that is, there is sometimes no 
proportion between the feeling of responsibility and 
the amount of responsibility afterwards shown. The 
main difficulty however is, that in our present state of 



knowledge, it is impossible to know, whether this very 
feeling of responsibility or of freedom is not itself 
necessarily caused, either psychologically or physio- 
logically or both. If we admit that we are compelled 
to believe we are free (as some indeterminists seem to 
claim) we deny freedom in this very statement. An- 
other obvious and practical ground for our ignorance 
as to this point, is the fact, that although for genera- 
tions the best and greatest minds have not failed to 
give .it their attention, yet, up to the present time, 
the question remains sub judicc. If we carried out 
practically the theory of freedom, we should have to 
punish some of the greatest criminals the least, since 
from their coarse organisation and lack of moral sense, 
their responsibility would be very small. There is no 
objection to speaking of freedom in the sense that a 
man as an individual may be free as to his outward 
surroundings, as in the case of a strong character 
which often acts independently and freely in respect 
to its outward environment. But to say that witliin 
the man himself, within his character or personality 
(brain and mind) there is freedom, is going entirely 
beyond our knowledge, for there is little or nothing 
demonstrated as to the inward workings of brain or 
mind. A similar idea is clearly expressed by Dr. Paul 
Carus in his interesting book entitled "The Ethical 
Problem," where he makes an important distinction 
between " necessity " and "compulsion." This point 
is well taken. Dr. Carus says : "A free man, let us 
say an artist full of one idea, executes his work with- 
out any compulsion, he works of his own free will. 
His actions are determined by a motive of his own, 
not by a foreign pressure. Therefore, we call him 

A scientific ethics must regard the question of free- 
dom as an unsettled problem. Any ethics would be 
unethical, in taking, as one of its bases, so debatable 
a question. 

Our general, sociological, ethical principle (as 
above stated,) is, that the idea of wrong depends upon 
the moral, intellectual, physical and financial danger or 
injury which a thought, feeling, 7villing or acting brings 
to humanity. 

But accepting this principle, the important ques- 
tion is just what are these thoughts, feelings, willings 
and actions, and by what method are they to be deter- 
mined? The first part of this question, on account of 
the narrow and limited knowledge at present, in those 
lines, can be answered only very imperfectly, if at all. 
As to the method, that of science seems to us the only 
one that can eventually be satisfactory. By the ap- 
plication of the scientific method is meant, that all 
facts, especially psychological (sociological, historical, 
etc.,) physiological and pathological must form the 
basis of investigation. Psychological facts that can 

be scientifically determined, as affecting humanity 
beneficially or not, are comparatively few in number. 
Physiologically, more facts can be determined as to 
their effect on humanity. But it is pre-eminently in 
the field of pathology that definite scientific results 
can be acquired. As to the difficult}' of investigating 
psycho-ethical effects, it may be said that physiological 
psychology and psycho-physics have not as yet fur- 
nished a sufficient number of scientific facts. 

By the scientific application of chemistry, clinical 
and experimental medicine with vivisection, to phj's- 
iology, many truths of ethical importance to humanity 
exist. But there is much here to be desired ; for ex- 
ample, what is said about questions of diet and ways 
of living in general, is scientifically far from satisfac- 
tory. The development of pathology in medicine has ' 
been without precedent. Its direct ethical value to 
humanity is already very great ; but the outlook into 
the future is still greater. It is only necessary to 
mention the discovery of the cholera and tuberculosis 
germs {a conditio sine qua non of their own prevention.) 
Immunity in the case of the latter would be one of the 
greatest benefactions yet known to the race. Medicine 
can be said to be the study of the future, especially in 
the scientific and prophylactic sense. It is to experi- 
mental medicine that scientific ethics will look for 
many of its basal facts. 

In' emphasising the scientific method, as the most 
important, it is not intended to exclude others. The 
a priori method has been of inestimable value to phi- 
losophy, ethics and theology and to science itself, in 
the forming of hypotheses and theories, which are 
often necessary anticipations of truth, to be verified 
afterwards. The a priori method is related to the 
a posteriori as the sails to the ballast of a boat : the 
more philosophy, the better, provided there are a suf- 
ficient number of facts : otherwise there is danger of 
upsetting the craft. 

The present office of ethics is, as far as the facts 
will allow, to suggest methods of conduct to follow, 
and ideals to hold, that will bring humanity into a 
more moral, physiological and normal state, enabling 
each individual to live more in harmony with nature's 
laws. Such an applied ethics must study especially the 
phenomena manifested in the different forms of patho- 
logical humanity, and draw its conclusions from the • 
facts thus gathered. 

But there are many scientists who look with sus- 
picion upon the introduction of philosophical thought 
and methods into their field. We may call them pure 
scientists ; that is to say, those who believe that the 
term scientific truth should be applied only to that 
form of truth which can be directly verified by facts 
accessible to all. Yet from this point of view, the ar- 
rangement, classification, forming of hypotheses and 


theories, and drawing philosophical conclusions are 
not necessarily illegitimate, provided those processes 
are clearly distinguished from each other and rigidly 
separated from the facts. Perhaps the study, which 
more than all others, will contribute toward a scien- 
tific ethics is criminology, the subject-matter of which 
touches the popular mind very closely, owing in a 
great measure to the influence of the Press ; and 
though this has its dangers, yet it is the duty of this 
as of every science, to make its principles and con- 
clusions as clear as possible to the public, since in the 
end, such questions vitally concern them. 

Crime can be said in a certain sense to be nature's 
experiment on humanity. If a nerve of a normal or- 
ganism is cut, the organs in which irregularities are 
produced are those which the nerve controls. In this 
way, the office of a nerve in the normal state may be 
discovered. The criminal is so to speak, the severed 
nerve of society and the study of him is a practical 
way (though indirect) of studying normal men. And 
since the criminal is seven-eighths like' other men, 
such a study is, in addition, a direct inquiry into nor- 
mal humanity. 

The relation also of criminology to society and to 
sociological questions is already intimate, and may in 
the future become closer. Just what crime is, at 
present, depends more upon time, location, race, 
country, nationality, and. even the State in which one 
resides. But notwithstanding the extreme relativity 
of the idea of crime, there are some things in our 
present social life that are questionable. A young 
girl of independence, but near poverty, tries to earn 
her own living at three dollars a week ; and if having 
natural desires for a few comforts and some taste for 
her personal appearance, she finally, through pressure, 
oversteps the bound, society, which permits this con- 
dition of things, immediately ostracises her. It bor- 
ders on criminality, that a widow works fifteen hours 
a day in a room in which she lives, making trousers 
at ten cents a pair, out of which she and her family 
must live, until they gradually run down towards 
death, from want of sufficient nutrition, fresh air and 
any com'fort. It is criminally questionable to leave 
stoves in cars, so that if the passenger is not seriously 
injured, but only wedged in, he will have the addi- 
tional chances of burning to death. It has been a 
general truth, and in some cases is still, that so many 
persons must perish by fire, before private individuals 
will furnish fire escapes to protect their own patrons. 
It is a fact that over five thousand people are killed 
yearly in the United States at railroad grade crossings, 
most of whose lives could have been spared, had 
either the road or the railroad passed, either one over 
the other. But it is said that such improvements 
would involve an enormous expense ; that is, practi- 

cally to admit that the extra money required is of more 
consequence than the five thousand human lives. And 
yet, strange as it may seem, if a brutal murderer is to 
lose his life, and there is the least doubt as to his pre- 
meditation, a large part of the community is often 
aroused into moral excitement, if not indignation, 
while the innocently murdered railroad passenger ex- 
cites little more than a murmur. 

There is perhaps no subject upon which the pub- 
lic conscience is more tender than the treatmept of 
the criminal. 

Psychologically the explanation is simple ; for the 
public have been educated gradually to feel the mis- 
fortune and sufferings of the criminal ; it is also easier 
to realise since the thought is confined generally to 
one personality at a time. But if the public could all 
be eye witnesses to a few of our most brutal railroad 
accidents, the consciousness gained, might be devel- 
oped into conscientiousness in the division of their 
sympathies. But this feeling, however paradoxical, is 
a sincere, though sometimes morbid expression, of un- 
selfish humanitarianism ; for the underlying impulses 
are of the highest ethical order, and over cultivation 
is a safer error than under-cultivation. The moral 
climax of this feeling was reached when the Founder 
of Christianity was placed between two thieves. 



To the Editor of The Open Court : — 

One of General Trumbull's recent paragraphs in The Open 
Court would tend to throw upon Walt Whitman the shadow of an 
unjust suspicion. While vaguely written, and probably not to be 
compassed or explicated by the general reader, it says enough and 
leaves enough unsaid to make it appear that Walt Whitman some- 
time, if not now, and in some way, by mean insinuation if not 
direct, appealed or appeals for or would gladly have received or 
receive a governmental pension. To those who know the truth of 
the matter — that is to say, the ignorance betrayed by the Gen- 
eral's reproach, — the later little paragraph from Tucker, of Liberty, 
which in substance rebukes the accusant and asks if it be not more 
splendid to save lives, with nurses, than to destroy them, with 
generals, excites appreciation and gratitude. 

What happens to be the record ? That a pension was men- 
tioned for Walt Whitman and that he, in his own person, in vigor- 
ous letters and through the voices of friends, protested that he 
did not deserve and would not take any grant of money from the 
government. This is authenticate history, not to be scribbled 
away on the smart edge of a paragraph. Whitman's immediate 
associates, certain editors of certain newspapers, several congress- 
men, at least, besides sundry observers attracted at the moment, 
are aware of all the attending circumstances, and value the light 
they throw on his purposes and character. 

An abstract question might be asked, viz. whether as fulfill- 
ment of justice men who sacrifice health in hospitals (with Whit- 
man it was health of superbest majesty) are not as much entitled to 
governmental guarantees as men who travel the life of a forager 
and fighter and come home shorn of the physical gifts with which 



they went. I am sure for myself that no line of logic can be drawn 
against a claim so clear. 

Wherein is Whitman pensionee ? In nothing beyond the 
area which comradeship yields him. Long were the years of his 
outlawry — long is the story of non-recognition and outrageous as- 
sault. He never complained. He cast back no retort. Keeping 
the path of heroic resolve — travelling with whatever soreness of 
foot or travail of spirit — he persevered, held his peace, continued 
his gospel, re-asserted his faith, accepted the human nature of foe 
and friend, dominated the arrogant phenomena and antagonism of 
the commonplace. There was need and poverty enough through 
mental and physical experiences following the war — paralysis. 
But friends came, new years brought wiser spirits nearer Whit- 
manic solutions, his genius provoked to shame, the conceit of mere 
brutal criticism, and certain material helps, till then denied, ar- 
rived plentifully to his tribute and relief. Now, in these later sea- 
sons, oppressed by bodily disasters which lead him close to the 
doors of death, he is free of all anxiety and acknowledges the his- 
toric and efficient rally of lovers and comrades. 

Is this unseemly ? Somewhere Whitman himself asks, why 
should he shame in the gifts of friends ? He gave all he had ; he 
labored to free literature from thralldom and democracy from 
clogging old-time old men of seas ; he went into the subtlest ser- 
vice of the war, where slept and played the brood of sorrow, — 
where it was not the mad heroism of battle but the still patient 
courage of suffering that commanded ; he sped lance against priest- 
crafts and politicaldom ; he compassed and displayed science, evo- 
lution, as never before in literature ; he provided the lofty vistas 
of personality, companioning and illustrating in himself the su- 
preme declaration of genius, that man, the natural, must dominate 
and make literature and life. 

These are great gifts, to-day greatly accepted by some, and 
to-morrow to enter the blood of the race. The little a few dollars 
can do to pass the word of gratitude up for this is small enough. 
No frank sweet word in which so great a character may describe 
his later ills can justly or intelligently be tortured into evidence 
for a charge of beggary. 

Whitman is loved by as devoted groups as ever blessed the 
way of martyrdom. These men and women are his for their best 
worth. Officialdom, whether civil or military, has intrinsically 
nothing either to give or to withhold. 

Horace L. Traubel. 


To the Editor of The Open Court: 

Mr. Traubel's criticism is well made, a little acrimonious 
perhaps, but not more so than my supposed offense deserved, an of- 
fense which I think has been exaggerated by the imagination of 
Mr. Traubel, excited by zeal in defense of a friend. 

According to Mr. Traubel, Walt Whitman is not on the pen- 
sion rolls, and never has been there. This, if true, and I suppose 
it is true, gives Mr. Traubel an apparent advantage over me in 
this discussion, but the advantage is weaker than it might be be- 
cause he admits that "a pension was mentioned for Walt Whit- 
man," but that Mr. Whitman protested against it. The newspaper 
account was that a pension had been granted ; and I never saw 
that statement contradicted until now. 

Reading the offending paragraph again I do not care to modify 
it. Mr. Whitman's letter to the Review of Revie-ci's, in which he said 
' ' I am totally paralysed from the old secession war time overstrain, " 
so much resembled what the claim agents call "supplementary 
proof " to support a pension, that I might be justified in so regard- 
ing it. Whether that is so or not, the letter was another contribu- 
tion to that huge mountain of egotistical cant which makes all our 
ailments, from consumption to corns and bunions, the result of 
patriotic sacrifices rendered by us in " the old secession war time." 

Mr. Traubel says : "An abstract question might be asked, 
viz. whether as fulfillment of justice men who sacrifice health in 
hospitals (with Whitman it was health of superbest majesty) are 
not as much entitled to governmental guarantees as men who travel 
the life of a forager and fighter ? " I do not see the use of going 
into the abstract here ; but if "governmental guarantees" is the 
' 'Whitmanic" phrase for pensions, I do not care to act as referee, 
especially as we are not debating whether a male nurse of "superb- 
est majesty " or a soldier is most worthy of "governmental guaran- 
tees." I do not believe that either of them ought to have a pen- 
sion. I believe that pensioning is one of the most corrupt and 
corrupting of governmental usurpations ; but if compelled to de- 
cide between the male nurse and the soldier, I should say give it 
to the soldier. If the question were between the soldier and the 
female nurse, I might vote the other way. 

So far as the praise of the male nurse reproaches me for hav- 
ing been a soldier instead of a nurse, I will bear it with such peni- 
tential humility as I can. In the excitement of the great struggle 
for liberty I did not notice it, but I begin to see how wicked it 
was for me to " travel the life of a forager and fighter," when I 
might have been a hospital nurse ; in which latter case I should 
not only have received the approbation of Mr. Traubel, but also 
I should have escaped a couple of bullets which unceremoniously 
knocked me out. Still, should the dispute have to be fought out 
again, I should probably act as I did before ; for looking back at 
the conflict in the calm and quiet of old age, I am rather gratified 
than otherwise that I fought for the preservation of the American 
republic and the overthrow of slavery. 

In reply to the " forager " sarcasm, let me say that male nurses 
could do more "foraging" among hospital stores, than the most 
rapacious of Sherman's bummers ever did among the plantations 
of Georgia. Whenever I am at the point of death, as I very often 
am, I renew the instructions which I gave to my family twenty 
years ago, " Tell the reporters when they come to write me up, 
to be kind enough to say that I did not die from disease contracted 
in the army:' 

His fervent adulation of Whitman is creditable to Mr. Traubel 
for it shows the goodness and softness of his nature. I have no 
desire to dispute the great services of Walt Whitman, outside the 
hospital, as eloquently set forth by Mr. Traubel. I do not doubt 
that he kept that rhetorically well worn path of " heroic resolve," 
that he "continued his gospel," that he "brought wiser spirits 
nearer Whitmanic solutions," that he " provided the lofty vistas 
of personality," and that he " dominated the arrogant phenomena 
and antagonism of the commonplace." These tributes are of the 
"abstract." They are outside the question, but they look very 
much as if the scheme to pension Mr. Whitman was not yet aban- 
doned. M. M. Trumbull. 


James Sully has contributed to The Monist an elaborate essay 
on the " Psychology of Conception," which is the leading article 
of the July number. Moncure D. Conway follows with a discussion 
of the " Right of Evolution," throwing much light on the develop- 
ment of American institutions and explaining the laws of the growth 
of institutions. It appears that we Americans are much more con- 
servative than we usually imagine ourselves to be. An extraordi- 
nary interest attaches to the contribution from the pen of one of the 
unfortunate eight anarchists, Michael Schwab, who after a care- 
ful study of Professor Lombroso's article on the " Physiognomy of 
the Anarchists," calls attention to several points in which the 
eminent Italian psychologist must have been mistaken. Michael 
Schwab's remarks are to the point and deserve the attention of the 
scholar, the psychologist and physiognomist for mere theoretical 
reasons. Yet they command the additional interest not only of 
American citizens, but also of every one who sympathises with 



enthusiasts and reformers. Enthusiasts and reformers also make 
mistakes ; Michael Schwab is not blind to that fact and his article 
is a contribution to the psychology of their aspirations. Next in 
line we have a controversy between Professor Hoffding of Copen- 
hagen and the editor, the former defending the principle that wel- 
fare or the greatest possible happiness constitutes the criterion of 
ethics, the latter maintaining that the criterion of ethics must not 
be sought in the subjective element of feeling pleasures or pains, 
but in the objective elements of facts. The ethical criterion must 
be sought in the expanse and growth of the human soul, pleasures 
and pains being incidental features only in the realisation of this 

The last article is. an essay on "Thought and Language" by 
Prof. F. Max Miiller. It is the substance of a lecture delivered 
before the Philosophical Society of Glasgow on January 21, 1891. 
Prof. F. Max Miiller criticises Herbert Spencer as well as Mr. G. J. 
Romanes. Without entering into the details of the controversy 
we may state here that we cannot agree with Prof. Max Miiller in 
one important point. He speaks of " the immense presumption 
that there has been no interruption in the developmental process 
in the course of psychological history " of which Professor Ro- 
manes is guilty. The editors of The Mollis/ are certainly guilty 
of the same " presumption," and we believe that all evolutionists 
who have discarded the idea of special-creation acts will have to 
adopt the same view which is more than a mere presumption. 

The literary correspondence from France is a review of the 
ethical text-books which are shown to be a decided step back- 
ward. The old Christian catechisms were more humanitarian and 
cosmopolitan ; the new French text-books for civic and moral in- 
struction take a narrow national view which under the disguise of 
patriotism dwarfs the minds of the children. Christian Ufer re- 
views the science of pedagogics in Germany. 

The book reviews are of special interest. John Dewey's "Out- 
lines of a Critical Theory of Ethics " and John S. Mackenzie's 
" Introduction to Social Philosophy" are discussed. Among the 
foreign books we note August Forel's " Der Hypnotismus " which 
lately appeared in the second edition ; Carneri's "Der Mensch " ; 
Paul du Bois-Reymond's " Grundlagen der Erkenntniss, " a deeply 
philosophical book of an agnostic character. Dr. Krause's book 
" Tuisko-Land " is an important contribution to anthropological 
science in a popular form. It is mainly a comparative mythology 
the results of which would corroborate the European origin of the 
Aryas. C. Dillmann's book " Die Mathematik die FackeltrSgerin 
einer neuen Zeit " is a justification of the plan to make mathemat- 
ics the cornerstone of a scientific education, the author being the 
principal of a Mathematical Highschool at Stuttgart. The con- 
temporary periodicals of a philosophical and ethical character, of 
America, England, France, Germany, and Russia, are reviewed 
so as to give of almost all their articles a concise synopsis. 

Whatever Moncure D. Conway writes is to the point ; he 
wields a vigorous pen and is fascinating as well as instructive. 
The following letter which pays a beautiful and honorable tribute 
to his abilities as an author, will be interesting to his many ad- 
mirers : 

Canterbury Freethought Association. 
Christchurch, New Zealand. 

Mr. Moncure D. Conway, 
Dear Sir : 

The members of the above association having read your ar- 
ticles in T/w Opfit Ci'Kii, at their last meeting held in the Free- 
thought Hall in this city, unanimously passed the following reso- 
lution : 

" That the Canterbury Freethought Association wish to place 
" on record their heartfelt thanks to Moncure D. Conway, for the 

" tribute of respect he has paid to our late revered leader— Charles 
" Bradlaugh." 

I may state Mr. R. Thompson of Milner & Thompson of this 
city made an effort to get the article referred to, reprinted in the 
leading liberal (!) paper here, and succeeded by paying for every 
word as an advertisement. 

Herewith I forward copies of both papers. I am, dear sir, 
Very Sincerely Yours, 

Francis J. Quinn, Secretary, C. F. A. 

A circular to the Friends of Russian Freedom signed by a 
great number of most prominent names, among them Kennan, 
Whittier, Lowell, Julia Ward Howe, Phillip Brooks, William 
Lloyd Garrison, etc., appeals to the American public for aid by 
all moral and legal means to obtain for Russia political freedom 
and self-government. There is no one who will not heartily sym- 
pathise with the aim of the society founded to this noble purpose, 
although we may doubt whether their efforts will be of any avail. 
The Society of the American Friends for Russian Freedom has 
been formed after the model of an English society of the same 
kind the organ of which is Free Russia. The circular declares : 

"We do not intend to approve and we are not asked to ap- 
prove, to support, or countenance the extreme and violent section 
of the Russian opposition. What we wish to do is to tell all liberty- 
loving Russians that many Americans are in deep and warm sym- 
pathy with their aspirations, that they will watch with eager atten- 
tion every new effort of theirs, will hail with enthusiasm their 
victory, and will mourn for their sufferings in case of defeat." 

Those who wish to join this society and receive also Fri-e 
Russia (published monthly) should send their names and post-office 
addresses, with the membership fee of One Dollar, to Francis J. 
Garrison, Treasurer, 4 Park Street, Boston, Mass. 






All communications should be addressed to 


(Nixon Building, 175 La Salle Street,) 



PENDENCE. Moncure D. CoNWAY 2859 

thur Mac Donald 2S61 



BEL 2S64 

IN ANSWER TO MR. TRAUBEL. M. M. Trumbull. 2865 
NOTES 2865 


The Open Court 


Devoted to the Work of Conciliating Religion -with Science 

No. 202. (Vol. V — 20 1 

CHICAGO, JULY 9, 1891. 



It is one thing to say that as matter of fact all men 
seek their own pleasure or happiness, and quite an- 
other thing to say that they should do so. The former 
statement belongs to the realm of psychology ; the 
latter proposes an ethical rule. In a previous article 
(June 4), I questioned the correctness of the psycho- 
logical statement and I now propose to inquire as to 
the tenability of the ethical rule sometimes derived 

At the outset, it strikes one as strange to propose 
as a rule what everyone is said to do of his own ac- 
cord. A rule should be something to guide us, but if 
we always do, and cannot help doing, what the rule 
enjoins, the rule becomes, to say the least, super- 
fluous. If we can no more help acting selfishly than 
we can help breathing, there is about as much sense 
in urging us to act selfishly as in putting the injunction 
upon us to breathe. 

A "should" naturally suggests the possibility of 
acting otherwise ; but if in the nature of the case we 
cannot act otherwise than we should act, the "should" 
is practically meaningless. There is little sense even 
in asking us to eschew self denial and unselfishness, 
if on account of our psychological constitution self- 
denial and unselfishness are impossible, and every act 
is necessarily interested and for our own advantage. 
And the fact that advocates of selfishness do warn us 
against unselfishness and sfelf-denial looks like a giving 
away of their case — since it is hardly rational to warn 
men against what they can as little do as they can 
escape from their own shadow or jump over the moon. 
Suppose some one should say that a straight line is 
the line which no one can help drawing in connecting 
two points. There would be nothing in such a state- 
ment to guide us when we were seeking to draw a 
straight line ; it would be the same as saying. Go 
ahead and draw in whatever way you like, a rule is 
quite unnecessary. The fact is, if all men act selfishly 
and must of necessity do so, ethics in general (and 
not merely any specific rule) is a superfluity ; and the 
very words, "should," "ought," "obligation," "duty" 
would have to pass into disuse and be regarded as 
survivals of an antiquated mode of thinking. 

Such moral scepticism or nihilism is also forced 

upon us by another consideration. If selfishness is the 
true ethical rule, i. e. if the pursuit of our personal 
pleasure or happiness is the right aim, it follows that 
any way in which we find happiness is right. If one 
person makes himself happy by doing good in the 
world, very well ; but if another finds that cruelty 
gives him pleasure, we must also say, very well. If 
this man finds it to his advantage to speak the truth 
and keep his word, he acts rightly in doing so ; if the 
other gets ahead by lying and breaking faith, he acts 
also rightly., A recent defender of selfishness * (and 
one who has the rare merit of being straightforward 
and fearless in his logic) goes to the length of saying 
that //it made him happy to get drunk, to treat his 
wife as his slave and to beat his children, he should 
undoubtedly do those things — and he asks, why then 
should he condemn those who actually live that way 
for no other reason than that he in fact finds his hap- 
piness in doing differently ? If then everything is right 
which gives one pleasure or happiness and the most 
contradictory things do give pleasure or happiness, it 
follows that moral distinctions break down and that 
love and hate, truth and lying, temperance and drunk- 
enness, marital faithfulness and adultery, stand on 
the same moral plane. Such is the conclusion drawn 
by the writer I have quoted. He says : 

" One act is just as virtuous as another ; one man is just as 
righteous as another. The man who picks my pockets is just as 
good a man, morally speaking, as he who at the risk of his life 
pulls me out of the river. The murderer is just as righteous as 
the philanthropist, the ravisher as innocent as his victim, a drunk- 
ard as moral as an ideal clergyman. Each of these only does what 
he must, will and should under the circumstances." 

And with remarkable consistency he adds : 

' ' Men muddle their brains with such words as right and wrong, 
morality, duty and virtue ; they say I ought to do this or not to do 
that . . . . ; but there are no such things or powers or obligations 
as these " In fact. " there is no morality but what vain people 
have manufactured." 

By no means does it follow that one must be a bad 
man to say such things ; I believe that this writer is 
personally not only one of the most straightforward 
and fearless, but one of the most just, unselfish and 
tender hearted of men. But I suppose that whatever 
he is he regards as his idiosyncracy ; and if b}' acci- 
dent he were mean and cruel instead, I suppose that 

* Hugh O. Pente 

T-weiitietli Century. ArnI 2. 

2 868 


he would deny (as a matter of logic) that there was 
any obligation for him to try to act differently. 

Such seems to be the logical outcome of selfishness 
as an ethical theory. Practically in an individual case, 
it may work no harm ; but in general, if men could 
sophisticate themselves so far as to adopt it and act 
upon it, the result would be grave moral deterioration. 
There are only two ways in which the result might be 
avoided ; first, if all men had good instincts and dis- 
positions to start with (which is manifestly untrue), 
and second, if there were a kind of pre-ordained con- 
stitution for every one, in virtue of which, whatever 
expectations men cherished in connection with wrong- 
doing, the actual and necessary result were misery and 
unhappiness. The latter proposition may possibly be 
true ; for one, I confess I should like to believe it. It 
would be a most powerful argument in favor of a moral 
order and constitution of the world, if it could be 
made out that however we may wish to be happy, 
there are only certain ways in which we can be happy, 
it would look as if nature itself was on the side of 
those "certain ways," and gradually discovered them 
to us in the course of our experience and manifold 

And yet as a matter of fact there are grave difficul- 
ties in the way. It is, of course, true that to one of 
sympathetic disposition the reflection that he has some- 
time been harsh and inconsiderate brings pain. A 
naturally just-minded man undoubtedly finds humilia- 
tion in recollection of any incident in which his in- 
terests betrayed him into unjust treatment of another. 
Dryden has finely said : 

'* The secret pleasure of a generous act 
Is the great mind's great bribe." 

But can it be truthfully said that every one feels a 
pang in remembrance of unsympathetic conduct ? If 
we do unjust things does it necessarily follow that we 
experience humiliation afterward ? Is the cut and 
make of our nature so that we cannot do mean things 
without subsequent revulsion of feeling — and to us all 
does the secret pleasure of a generous act come like a 
great bribe ? As I have said, I should like to believe 
so ; but the fact seems to be that human nature is 
variable, and what gives pain to one person does not 
to another. It is sometimes by our thoughts, our 
speculative reason and not by convincing experiences 
of pleasure or pain that we learn what is right. What 
a noble saying is that of Sir Philip Sidney's ! — " Doing 
good is the only certainly happy action of a man's 
life." But I am afraid the truth is simply that doing 
good is the only certainly happy action of a good xnvcCs 
life. Does giving make a miser happy? It seems to 
cost as much discomfort and pain for some men to 
part with a dollar as for a child to cut a tooth. 

" Society is no coinfoi t 

says Shakespeare. Sometimes we are not happy in 
doing good to ourselves any more than in doing good 
to others. As the same great observer and critic of 
human life has written : 

" Your affections are 
A sick man's appetite, who desires most that 
which would increase his evil." 

As men are, personal comfort and happiness make 
a poor guide for them. It is safe to have supreme 
regard for such a standard, only when we are already 
perfectly moralised and rationalised — that is, when 
reason and conscience have such a dominancy in us 
that we can have no happiness save in following their 
dictates. And even then, when as Wordsworth says, 
joy has become "its own security," joy would not 
really be the guide, but the effect of following the true 
guide, which is ever to be found in the rational nature 
of man. As most men are, it is actually dangerous to 
follow after what each thinks will make him happy 
and that only ; it is because they do this so unthink- 
ingly that they fall into the pitfalls that they do. 
George Eliot had given up all theological views of 
morality, and yet she once wrote, " There are so many 
things wrong and difficult in the world that no man 
can be great — he can hardl)' keep himself from wicked- 
ness — imless he gives up thinking much about pleas- 
ure and rewards, and gets strength to endure what is 
painful." What better illustration could we have of 
the truth of this, than in Mr. Pentecosts own words : 
" Don't kill the Czar unless to do so would surely make 
you happier, but if it would make you happier, then 
kill him," and, again, "Don't destroy property or 
throw stones at scabs, unless you are sure it would 
make you happier to do so, but if you are sure, then 
do it." There is, of course, no deed of shame, no 
wild act of blood, no monstrous tyranny that could not 
be justified for the perpetrator of it by the same logic 
— the Czar himself and all persecutors, monopolists, 
seducers of the innocent, grinders of the poor, de- 
vourers of widows' houses, being thus made blameless. 

It is not in place for me at present to attempt to 
say what the true guide is : my object is purely criti- 
cal. But I may briefly remark in general that guid- 
ance, in my view, lies in our thoughts rather than our 
desires for pleasure and happiness. We can find pleas- 
ure in all sorts of things, but we cannot think all sorts 
of things to be right. Our thoughts are ahead of our 
impulses ; there are certain things we are bound to 
call right by virtue of our very nature as rational 
beings and to the extent men have followed reason, 
they have done so. It is in these progressive and en- 
larging thoughts that I find the clue to nature's pur- 
pose with regard to us, to the Divine plan of our being. 
]Vc cannot help thinking certain things to lie right ; we 
may not do them, we may not want to do them, our 
wishes may go clean contrary to them, and yet, if we are 



honest with ourselves, we cannot help thinking them 
to be right. The practical problem of life is to make 
our thoughts, and not our haphazard cravings for 
pleasure, rule. Here is the field of moral conflict, the 
occasion for the exercise of the moral will. 

" And oh, when Nature sinks, as oft she may, 
Tluough loPK-Iived pressure of obscure distress. 
Still to be strenuous tor the bright reward, 
Still in the soul to admit of no decay. 
Brook no continuance of weakmiiidedness — 
Great is the glory, for the strife is hard ! " 

XB. The follo-tving three articles are criticisms of Mr. Salter's 
first article "Sclfshness: a Psychological Argument," which ap- 
peareJ in No. jgy of The Open Court. — Ed. 



It was with more than ordinary interest that I read 
William M. Salter's recent contribution entitled "Self- 
ishness : A Psychological Argument," to The Open 
Court — particularly because his treatment of the sub- 
ject seemed to me to be most ingenuously devised. 
His criticism of the position held by Leslie Stephen, 
Lester Ward, Bain and Bentham will not, I think, 
hold good. He seems to think that to a.ct for a thing 
such as happiness as an end is to act with it constantly 
in mind, as if not to do so were a possibility. He 
then instances the youthful player at ball who is de- 
sirous of beating all his contestants in the game, (the 
victory which he expects to receive will afford him the 
most agreeable sensation which is called happiness) 
but who as he warms up in the game forgets all about 
the real end which he has in view, viz. the pleasure 
to be derived from beating or from becoming the vic- 
tor in the game. Mr. Salter thinks that if the end is 
the happiness to be received by winning the game, 
then he would have it always in mind. How does 
Mr. Salter know that he does not have this very pleas- 
ure in mind, and if so, what difference does it make, 
if as Mr. Salter thinks, he plays having in mind the 
chief or relative steps to the end in view could he get 
victory or the result of victory — which to him is so 
much pleasure — without leading his conduct on the 
field toward the attainment of the end which he is 
conceded to have in view. To change the figure, can 
a man who desires to be happy by using his talent 
rightly along the line of art, medicine, law, or mer- 
cantile business, ever expect to obtain happiness in 
the particular way he has chosen, by not having in 
mind the means to the end — whatever they may be ? 
And is it not a play on words to say that because one does 
not always have in mind (how can he think two differ- 
ent thoughts at the -same time any more than he can 
occupy at the same time two places) correlatively and 
simultaneously both the means to as well as the end 
for which he acts, he is not acting for happiness. The 

psychological analysis of Mr. Salter seems, therefore, 
to me to be untenable in this instance. Then, again, 
he alleges that the motive of hunger, if I may be per- 
mitted to call it such, or the satisfying of appetite is 
not the pleasure which results from the act of eating, 
but it is the desire for an object such as food that 
prompts one to eat. This may be true as far as it 
goes, but this appears to me to be the fact or the real 
status of the case, that whereas an excessively hungry 
man would eat simply " to fill up," a man in a normal 
condition as well as a starving man would eat as much 
for the pleasure which would result in the general 
process of living from his keeping his physical organ- 
ism, by eating proper food, in a sound and healthful 
state ; or in addition to the pleasure which one is af- 
forded by eating that which he likes, there is the ulti- 
mate pleasure which is derived from eating the proper 
food judiciously. This after all is the chief considera- 

Mr. Salter neglected to touch upon the pleasure 
which is not so much a result of choice as it is the re- 
sult of action prompted by constitution and mechan- 
ism. An egotistic person acts, it is said, from the 
motive of self-interest while the altruistic person acts 
from the motive of self-love or benevolence. Egotism 
pleases but does not benefit a man, while altruism 
pleases and benefits him. Nay more than this, whilu 
egotism curses the egotist, altruism blesses not only 
the altruist, but humanity. In order to get the best 
and most permanent happiness one should seek for 
and use the means which will produce it. To say that 
one cannot seek and obtain his highest happiness ra- 
tionally and resolutely is to say that we are in the 
world to obtain our highest good by being a blind 
leader of the blind. 



EuDEJiONis.M makes the feelings of pleasure and 
pain the foundation of its edifice of moral science say- 
ing, that a state of pleasure, or a diminution of pain, 
constitutes, in every case, the sole motive of action. 
An attempt to disprove this principle was made by 
Mr. W. M. Salter in No. 197 of The Open Court. Had 
he limited himself to a discussion of the propriety of 
the qualification "sole" given to "motive," he might 
have had a better chance of success. The pivotal 
point of the discussion, however, is the definition of 
the word "pleasure." Pleasurable feelings are so 
different as to render any attempt at a definition of 
general acceptability extremely difficult. The only 
definition ever offered satisfactory to my mind, is that 
proposed by Dr. P. Carus in his " Soul of Man," say- 
ing, that "pleasure is the feeling that naturally ac- 
companies the gratification of wants " (p. 343). 



In order to make this definition serviceable, it will 
be necessary to agree upon the meaning of the word 
"want." A want is a feeling of deficiency. Hunger, 
for example, is a feeling of a deficiency of nourish- 
ment, or a want of food ; cold is a feeling of a defi- 
ciency of heat, or a want of warmth. Thus is love a 
feeling of a deficiency of society, or of the complete- 
ness of being, or a want of intercourse with another 
being. The sense of dut)' in an emergency shows a 
deficiency of right action, or a feeling of a want lo act 
in obedience to conscience. 

Let us see how the definition fits the cases adduced 
by Mr. Salter in No. 197 of Tlie Open Court. He says 
of hunger that i' it is not the pleasure of satisfying 
hunger the really hungry man is thinking of, but the 
food — it seems a direct appetite for an object." Hun- 
ger is a feeling of some shortage, or emptiness to be 
filled ; a painful deficiency to be replenished ; replen- 
ishing, or filling being the natural remedy for the want. 
This remedy is found in eating which, by diminishing 
the pain, grows pleasurable, in agreement with the 
eudemonistic principle. 

If Mrs. Browning says: "If heads that hold a 
rhythmic thought must ache perforce, then I, for one, 
choose headaches," she clothes a eudemonistic ex- 
perience in the paradoxical form of a desire for pain. 
She does not truly choose headaches — not fool enough 
for it. But not being able to secure the pleasure of 
rhythmic thought without the accompaniment of a 
painful headache, she submits to the latter rather than 
forego the pleasure of the former. It is a clear eude- 
monistic transaction. 

J. St. Mill's assertion that men will "pursue sen- 
sual indulgences (i. e. pleasures) to the injury of 
health, though perfectly aware that health is the greater 
good," is an uncommonly strong confirmation of the 
eudemonistic law. The man indulging, is moved by 
a present pleasure so powerfully as to disregard an 
unmistakable warning of pain to follow in the future. 
Present pleasure overpowering a hope of remote pleas- 
ure, is a well known eudemonistic experience. 

J. St. Mill considering the condition of a discon- 
tented Socrates preferable to that of a contented pig, 
pronounces every kind of philosophical thought so 
great a pleasure as to render the condition of a Socrates 
even when discontented or seemingly unhappy, more 
desirable than that of a hog whether such hog should 
walk on four legs or on two. Mill intends to gauge 
the pleasure of Socrates and that of the hog in order 
to vindicate the eudemonistic principle. 

Enoch Arden desirous of possessing his wife again, 
feels it to be his greatest duty to provide for her hap- 
piness. He feels he would be tormented with pains 
were he to disturb her happy, cmdition. But her hap- 
piness depends upon his resigning his claims on her. 

His renunciation seems the only means to secure her 
liappiness and thereby his own greatest gratification. 
Or, Enoch Arden's self-denial is a corroboration of 

Every one of the examples recited in No. 197 of 
The Open Court can be treated like the above examples 
in order to show the application of eudemonism to 
every kind of human action. The above discussions, 
however, suffice to demonstrate that in every effective 
motive of action a feeling of pleasure or pain is found. 
Any such feeling may be called an interest, or, there 
is no effective motive unless the agent is interested in 
it. Anything indifferent can never, in a healthy being, 
be a want to be gratified, or an anticipation of pleas- 
ure, or an object to be desired or willed. Being in- 
terested in an object, means, being inclined fo give 
attention to it, or to- concentrate our activities upon 
it, or to will it. Thus, an interest, or a pleasurable 
emotion, says the law, is necessary to transform a con- . 
ception into an effective motive of action. 

The law of pleasure and pain is founded in our 
nature, says modern evolutionary thought, that is to 
say, it is a natural law acting with necessity. It says 
that every living creature, in a condition of health, 
strives to obtain pleasure and to obviate pain, or, it is 
these subconscious feelings of pleasure or pain, which 
prompt every action performed within animated na- 
ture. The muscular reactions observed in the lowest, 
or simplest living beings, are what is commonly called 
reflex motions. A reflex motion is a muscular reaction 
responding to a subconscious feeling. The reaction 
shows whether the feeling was either agreeable or dis- 
agreeable, i. e. pleasurable or painable. 

Similar motions are observable in higher animals. 
A bull excited by pain will fly into a fury and hurry 
along carelessly, almost unconsciously, a proceeding 
hardly distinguished from reflex motion. All activity 
of living creatures continues of this kind until reflec- 
tive thought has grown to be a power strong enough 
to act as a check upon reflex motions caused by feel- 
ings of pleasure or pain. Such checks may be noticed, 
for example, in a lion who having failed to reach his 
prey by making his leap too short, proceeds to undergo 
a special course of training in the art of jumping, by 
measuring the distance and practising until he has 
found out and learned to put forth the exact amount 
of exertion requisite to give to his leap the length 
wanted. Such rational proceedings can no longer be 
called reflex motions ; they are distinctly conscious 
activity regulated b)' reflection and by a determination 
not easy to distinguish from what is called "will" in 
man. There is a motive in the leonine activity which 
can no longer be identified with a subconscious feeling 
of pain or pleasure, but which is the result of that 
mental activity called reflection. Such motives may 



be called intellectual motives to distinguish them from 
sensitive motives as found in the subconscious feel- 
ings of pleasure or pain. 

When the stage of mental reflection is reached in 
the animal kingdom, the immediate effect of a feeling 
of pleasure or pain, is checked or modified. The re- 
flective mind begins to distinguish between its own 
feelings and external objects. From that stage on- 
ward the action of the natural law of pleasure and pain 
is complicated' by the interference of intellectual mo- 
tives, that is, of conceptions not immediately identi- 
fiable with feelings of pleasure or pain. 

Reflex activity forms the greater amount even of 
the doings of the human race. Men whose senses act 
with sufficient energy, will perform the common acts 
of daily life, that is not merely those of their animal 
existence but also those of their business occupations 
according to the natural rule of pleasure and pain. 
They are used to attend to their daily business in 
a machine like manner. The various activities of 
business life are the effects of settled habits of thought, 
that is to sa)', the mind has formed a series of con- 
ceptions each of which corresponds to an act of busi- 
ness to be performed. At any given moment of the 
day, one of these business conceptions is uppermost 
in the mind, forming the centre of interest, the sensi- 
tive motive that wants to be acted out. This want 
has to be gratified by the performance of whatever 
activity' the conception may suggest. Little reflection 
is needed. Attention to what is going on is all that 
is required. The performance is pleasurable because 
it is in conformity with habit, or agreeable to the na- 
ture of the individual. An infraction of daily habits is 
liable to cause pain. Or, in other words, the habitual 
activity of the daily life of men, like that of animals, 
is regulated by the natural law of pleasure and pain. 

So far the eudemonisti